JAMSHED & SHIRIN GUZDER TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CUMBALLA HILL, MUMBAI

ITA 7732/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 October 2026AY 2026-2710 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the qualification imposed by the Ld. CIT(E), making the registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G, along with their consequential tax benefits, conditional upon the outcome of proceedings proposed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, cannot be sustained. The Tribunal reasoned that a judgment of the jurisdictional High Court is binding on subordinate authorities unless stayed, reversed, or modified. The mere proposal or intention to challenge a binding judgment before a superior court does not render the judgment's operation conditional. Since the Ld. CIT(E) granted the registration and approval in compliance with the binding Bombay High Court decision, it was not open for him to dilute the consequences by making statutory benefits contingent on prospective proceedings. The Tribunal directed the Ld. CIT(E) to expunge the observations contained in Condition No. 15 of the Section 12AB order and Condition No. 5 of the Section 80G order, stating that the registration and approval shall otherwise remain undisturbed and operate in accordance with law and the remaining applicable conditions. The substantive grounds raised by the assessee were allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Jamshed & Shirin Guzder Trust, filed appeals against two orders dated 13/04/2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai (Ld. CIT(E)). These orders granted registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961, respectively. However, both the registration and approval were made conditional upon the outcome of proceedings proposed by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The assessee's grievance is limited to these conditional observations, not the grant of registration or approval itself. The conditions were imposed due to the absence of an explicit irrevocability clause in the trust deed and the Revenue's intention to challenge a Bombay High Court decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(E) erred in granting conditional approval under Section 80G of the Act by adding conditions making the applicability and consequential tax benefits subject to the outcome of the Special Leave Petition to be filed by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the Bombay High Court's order in The Chamber of Tax Consultants & Ors v. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(E) erred in imposing a condition on the registration under Section 12AB, making its applicability and consequential tax benefits conditional upon the outcome of the Revenue's proposed proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, despite the trust being registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, which makes it inherently irrevocable by operation of law. Assessee's Contentions: The Ld. AR argued that the Ld. CIT(E) acknowledged the binding decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in The Chamber of Tax Consultants & Ors. v. CIT(E), which held that a public charitable trust is deemed irrevocable by operation of law unless the trust instrument expressly confers a power of revocation. Despite this, the Ld. CIT(E) made the consequential benefits conditional on future Supreme Court proceedings, thereby diluting the granted registration/approval and creating uncertainty. The assessee prayed for expungement of these objectionable observations. Revenue's Contentions: The Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(E).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA 7732/MUM/2026
ITA 7733/MUM/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई पीठ", मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BENCH: C BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 7732/MUM/2026 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2026-27) JAMSHED & SHIRIN GUZDER CIT (EXEMPTIONS) TRUST 601,6TH FLOOR, CUMBALLA N S GUZDER & CO NEVILLE HILL MTNL BUILDING, HOUSE ,CURRIMBHOY ROAD PEDDER ROAD, DR BALLARD ESTATE ,MUMBAI GOPALRAO DESHMUKH Vs. 400038, MUMBAI-400038, MARG, CUMBALLA HILL, MAHARASHTRA MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA अपीलाथ" Appellant ""थ" Respondent

PAN of Assessee: AAATJ2603H

अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant represented by: Shri Bhavya Sundesha, AR ""थ" "ारा/Respondent represented Shri Srinivasa Rao Vona, CIT, by: DR (virtually appeared)

ITA 7733/MUM/2026 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2026-27) JAMSHED & SHIRIN GUZDER CIT (EXEMPTIONS) TRUST 601,6TH FLOOR, CUMBALLA C/O N S GUZDER & CO HILL MTNL BUILDING, NEVILLE HOUSE,CURRIMBHOY PEDDER ROAD, DR ROAD BALLARD GOPALRAO DESHMUKH Vs. ESTATE.MUMBAI, MUMBAI- MARG, CUMBALLA HILL, 400038, MAHARASHTRA MUMBAI MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA अपीलाथ" Appellant ""थ" Respondent

PAN of Assessee: AAATJ2603H

ITA 7732& 7733/MUM/2026 JAMSHED

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 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →