CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions

363 ITR 230High Court2014#906 most cited

What is CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions authority for?

For a charitable trust, a violation of Section 13(1)(d) does not lead to the denial of exemption under Section 11 on its total income. Instead, only income derived from investments or deposits made in violation of Section 11(5) or income diverted under Section 13(1)(c) or 13(1)(d) is taxable.

117

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,369 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions · Section 11 · Section 13(1)(d) · Section 11(5) · charitable trust exemption · denial of exemption · partial taxation of income · Section 164(2) · income diversion by trust

Also reported as

44 Taxmann.com 275

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 12Section 12AASection 13Section 119Section 132Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 12ab(4)(ii)section 12aa(1)(b)(ii)section 13(l)(d)section 164(2)section 10(22)section 12aa(1)(b)section 12aa(1)section 13(1)(d)section 11(5)section 13(1)(c)(ii)section 12aa(3)section 12ab(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions

Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Jaipur vs. M/S Apollo Animal Medical Group Trust, Jaipur

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 960/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jan 2021AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (C.A.) &For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Add.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…decisions:- • Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions [2014] 51 taxmann.com 378 (SC) wherein SLP was rejected and decision of Hon'ble Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions [2014] 363 ITR 230 was affirmed. • Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs Working Women Forum [2014] 365 ITR 353 (Madras) • Bombay High Court in the case of DIT (Exemptions) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust [2001] 249 ITR 533/114 Taxman 19 (Bom.) ITA No. 960/JP/2018 & CO No.05/JP/2020 26 M/s Apollo Animal Medical Group Trust vs. ITO (E) In view of…

ITO (E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Iilm Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1131/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…He brought to our notice that the said decision has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court now reported in 178 Taxmann 436. He further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.). He further pointed out that SLP filed by the Revenue against the aforesaid judgment has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.2223 of 2015. Thus, complete denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 cannot be made. ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 26 31. Regarding addition of Rs.34,…

ADIT(E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Iilm Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2872/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…He brought to our notice that the said decision has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court now reported in 178 Taxmann 436. He further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.). He further pointed out that SLP filed by the Revenue against the aforesaid judgment has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.2223 of 2015. Thus, complete denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 cannot be made. ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 26 31. Regarding addition of Rs.34,…

ADIT(E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Iilm Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2871/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…He brought to our notice that the said decision has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court now reported in 178 Taxmann 436. He further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.). He further pointed out that SLP filed by the Revenue against the aforesaid judgment has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.2223 of 2015. Thus, complete denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 cannot be made. ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 26 31. Regarding addition of Rs.34,…

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. Iilm Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2675/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…He brought to our notice that the said decision has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court now reported in 178 Taxmann 436. He further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.). He further pointed out that SLP filed by the Revenue against the aforesaid judgment has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.2223 of 2015. Thus, complete denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 cannot be made. ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 26 31. Regarding addition of Rs.34,…

Iilm Foundaion, New Delhi vs. ADIT (Exemption), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1142/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…He brought to our notice that the said decision has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court now reported in 178 Taxmann 436. He further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.). He further pointed out that SLP filed by the Revenue against the aforesaid judgment has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.2223 of 2015. Thus, complete denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 cannot be made. ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 26 31. Regarding addition of Rs.34,…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Circle, Jaipur vs. Mahatma Gandhi Charitable Society for Education and Research, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for Statistical purposes with no order as to cost

ITA 359/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jan 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Runi Paul, JCIT DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 11Section 13Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…This principle of law is settled by the following decisions referred by the AO:- DCIT vs Working Women’s Forum (2015) 235 Taxman 516 (SC). CIT vs Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions (2014) 227 Taxman 369 (SC) CIT vs Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutins(2014) 363 ITR 230 (Kar.) CIT vs Orpat Charitable Trust (2015) 230 Taxman 0066 (Guj) H.C. DIT (Exemption) vs Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust,249 ITR 533 (Bom.) 7 The DCIT (Exemptions) Circle – Jaipur vs Mahatama Gandhi Charitable Society for Education and Resarch, Jaipur M/s. Santokba Durlabhji Trust Fund vs ITO in ITA No. 169/JP/2012 for A.Y. 2008-09…

DCIT, Exemptions, Chennai vs. Sri Rengambal Educational Trust, Thiruvannamalai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 394/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 394/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Sri Renugambal Educational Trust, Income Tax (Exemptions-Iii), Chennai Vs. I.C.C. Road, Ettivadi, Polur Taluk, Circle, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Thiruvannamalai 606 907. Building, Iii Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaets9713L] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A. Soundararajan, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 14.10.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 12.12.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erroneously Allowed The Exemption Under Section 11 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“ Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri A. Soundararajan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: None
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 2

…CIT(A) has failed to consider the decision of the ITAT, Chennai in the case of DDIT(E) v. Paramasiva Naidu Muthuvel Raj Education Trust (supra), wherein the Tribunal has considered the decision in the case of CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions [2014] 363 ITR 230 (Kar.) and in the case of CIT v. Working Women Forum [2014] 363 ITR 353 (Mad.). We have gone through the case law relied on by the Department in the grounds of appeal and find that in the case of DDIT v. Paramasiva Naidu Muthuvel Raj Education Trust (supra), it is clear cut case of violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act since in t…

M/S.Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust, Calicut vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle-2, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 261/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec…

M/S.Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust, Calicut vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle-2, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 260/COCH/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec…

M/S.Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust, Calicut vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle-2, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 259/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec…

M/S.Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust, Calicut vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle-2, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 258/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec…

M/S.Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust, Calicut vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle-2, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 257/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec…

M/S.Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust, Calicut vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle-2, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 256/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec…

M/S.Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust, Calicut vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle-2, Calicut

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 255/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) Surat City Gymkhana vs. DCIT (254 ITR 733) (Guj.) 2) Chirec…

M/S. the Board of Control for Cricker in India, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6705/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Counsel a/wFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh a/w
Section 10(23)Section 11Section 12A

…on under section 11 of the Act. The learned Sr. Counsel in support of his contention relied upon the following decisions:– i) DIT v/s Seth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust, [2001] 249 ITR 533 (Bom.); ii) CIT v/s Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions, [2014] 363 ITR 230 (Kar.); iii) The Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council v/s ITO, ITA no.1572/Bom./1989, dated 03.10.1997; and iv) Audyogik Shikshan Mandal v/s ITO, [2016] 156 ITD 001 (Pn.) (TM). 8. We have patiently and carefully heard rival submissions and perused materials on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon. Undisputedly…

DDIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Paramasiva Naidu Muthurvelraj Educational Trust, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the

ITA 2005/CHNY/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.V.Aroon Prasad, JCIT,D.RFor Respondent: Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

…f exemption u/s.11 of the Act. 7. In reply, ld.A.R vehemently supported the order of ld.CIT(A). The ld.A.R placed before us a copy of decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Fr.Mullers Charitable Institutions reported in [2014] 363 ITR 230(Karnataka) wherein it had been held that only income from investment or deposit which has been made in violation of sec.11(5) of the Act is liable to be taxed and the :- 5 -: CO No.60/CHNY/2013 violation u/s.13(1)(d) of the Act does not tantamount to denial of exemption u/s.11 on total income of assessee-trust. The ld.A.R also placed reliance up…

M/S. Free Trade Union Multipurpose Project Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption)- 1(3), Mumbai

ITA 6954/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & G. Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: N. R Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Pooja Swaroop, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 13(1)Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND G. MANJUNATHA, AM ITA No. 3080 To 3084/Mum/2016 and ITA No. 6952 To 6954/Mum/2017 (A.Y. 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09,2009-10,2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15) M/s Free Trade Union The Income Tax Officer Multipurpose Project Trust, (Exemptions)-1(3), Mumbai- 4 th Kennedy House, Floor, 400 012 Vs. Goregaonkar Road, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007. Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AAAFF0003F ITA No. 1336/Mum/2014, ITA No. 3793 To 3795/Mum/2016 and ITA No. 3800 To 3801/Mum/2016 (A.Y. 2003-04, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and…

M/S. Free Trade Union Multipurpose Project Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption)- 1(3), Mumbai

ITA 6953/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & G. Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: N. R Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Pooja Swaroop, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 13(1)Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND G. MANJUNATHA, AM ITA No. 3080 To 3084/Mum/2016 and ITA No. 6952 To 6954/Mum/2017 (A.Y. 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09,2009-10,2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15) M/s Free Trade Union The Income Tax Officer Multipurpose Project Trust, (Exemptions)-1(3), Mumbai- 4 th Kennedy House, Floor, 400 012 Vs. Goregaonkar Road, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007. Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AAAFF0003F ITA No. 1336/Mum/2014, ITA No. 3793 To 3795/Mum/2016 and ITA No. 3800 To 3801/Mum/2016 (A.Y. 2003-04, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and…

M/S. Free Trade Union Multipurpose Project Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption)- 1(3), Mumbai

ITA 6952/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & G. Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: N. R Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Pooja Swaroop, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 13(1)Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND G. MANJUNATHA, AM ITA No. 3080 To 3084/Mum/2016 and ITA No. 6952 To 6954/Mum/2017 (A.Y. 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09,2009-10,2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15) M/s Free Trade Union The Income Tax Officer Multipurpose Project Trust, (Exemptions)-1(3), Mumbai- 4 th Kennedy House, Floor, 400 012 Vs. Goregaonkar Road, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007. Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AAAFF0003F ITA No. 1336/Mum/2014, ITA No. 3793 To 3795/Mum/2016 and ITA No. 3800 To 3801/Mum/2016 (A.Y. 2003-04, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and…