TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -17(3), MUMBAI

ITA 4496/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 October 2025AY 2016-1727 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue of whether a charitable trust registered under Section 12A and eligible for exemption under Section 11 can claim exemption under Sections 10(34) and 10(35) is identical to an issue decided in the assessee's own case for AY 2012-13 by a Coordinate Bench. In that decision, the Coordinate Bench had held in favour of the assessee, allowing exemption under Section 10(34). The Tribunal found this precedent applicable. Therefore, the Tribunal ruled that the assessee is eligible to claim exemption under Sections 10(34) and 10(35) of the Act. The Tribunal's decision in favour of the assessee on this ground meant that the denial of exemption by the AO and CIT(A) was incorrect. Consequently, the assessee's appeals on this issue were allowed. The Tribunal also noted that for AY 2017-18, the grounds concerning the validity of the trust's registration under Section 12A and the applicability of Sections 11 to 13 were also decided in favour of the assessee, as were grounds related to deductions under Sections 80G and 80GGA. The Revenue's appeals were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Tata Education Trust, a registered charitable trust, filed returns declaring NIL income for various assessment years (AYs) from 2013-14 to 2017-18. The Assessing Officer (AO) noticed investments in Tata Sons Ltd. shares, leading to dividend income of Rs. 12,06,00,000/- and income from units of Rs. 32,504/-. The AO held these investments violated Sections 13(1)(d) and 11(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and Section 13(2)(h) due to a trustee's chairmanship in Tata Sons Ltd. Consequently, the AO denied exemption under Section 11 and Sections 10(34)/10(35), taxing the income at the maximum marginal rate. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld the AO's reasoning regarding violations but granted partial relief by taxing only dividend income at the maximum marginal rate, while other incomes were taxed at the normal rate. The assessee appealed against these orders.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee, a charitable trust registered under Section 12A and eligible for exemption under Section 11, can claim exemption under Section 10(34) for dividend income and Section 10(35) for income from units, when the AO and CIT(A) found violations of Sections 13(1)(d), 11(5), and 13(2)(h) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that exemption under Sections 10(34) and 10(35) cannot be rejected solely because the trust is registered under Section 12A and claims exemption under Section 11. They relied on a Coordinate Bench decision in their own case for AY 2012-13, which allowed such exemption. The assessee also contended that the CIT(A) wrongly applied the decision in CIT vs. Working Women's Forum. Revenue's contention: The Revenue supported the reasoning of the departmental authorities, who denied exemption under Sections 10(34) and 10(35) based on violations of Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2)(h).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 13(2)(h),Section 10(34),Section 10(35),Section 11,Section 11(5),Section 13(1)(d),Section 12A,Section 154,Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 80G,Section 80GGA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.4282, 4283, /Mum/2024 (Assessment Years:2014-15, 2013-14,)

Tata Education Trust, Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Circle-2(1), Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AAATT 9835A

ITA No.4156, 4496, 4727 & 4835/Mum/2024 (Assessment Years:2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18)

Tata Education Trust, Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax-17(3) Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AAATT 9835A

ITA No.4852, 4419, 4873 /Mum/2024 (Assessment Years:2013-14, 2014-15 and 2017-18)

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax- 26(1), Room No. 249, 2nd Floor Kautilya Bhavan, BKC, Mumbai-400 051 Vs. Tata Education Trust, 2nd Floor, Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AAATT 9835A

Appellant by : Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Shri Sukhsagar Syal & Shri Atul Suraiya Respondent by : Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT DR (Appellant) (Respon

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 13(2)(h)

All 84 judgments and leading authorities on Section 13(2)(h) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →