“maximum marginal rate”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(29C) / ITR-6 Schedule 115TD587 judgments

The decision most relied on for maximum marginal rate is 1. Father Mullers Charitable Institutions 363 IT 230 (Kar.) 2. DIT(E) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust (249 ITR 533), cited in 108 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on maximum marginal rate

1. Father Mullers Charitable Institutions 363 IT 230 (Kar.) 2. DIT(E) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust

249 ITR 533 · 2001 · High Court

108

citing judgments

Income of a trust that is taxable at the maximum marginal rate should be taxed accordingly, while other income is eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act.

DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse

259 ITR 280 · 2003 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Violation of investment mandates under Section 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a charitable trust results in the complete denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Act.

Trust (249 ITR 533) (Bom.) 3. CIT vs. Red Rose School (163 Taxman 19 (All.) 4. DIT(E) v. Alarippu (

172 ITR 698 · 1988 · High Court

citing judgments

Income received by a trust from sources like extra fees can be taxed at the maximum marginal rate, while other income remains eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s

108 ITR 555 · 1977 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Where the shares of beneficiaries in a trust are determinate, trustees must be assessed separately for each beneficiary's share, treating each beneficiary as an individual. The income is then taxed at the marginal rate applicable to individuals, not at the maximum rate for an association of persons.

CIT v. Working Women’s Forum

365 ITR 353 · 2014 · High Court

citing judgments

When an exemption is denied under Section 13(1)(c) or (d), the denial of exemption applies only to the portion of income that violates these provisions, not the entire income.

CIT v. V.S. Dempo & Co. Pvt. Ltd.

336 ITR 209 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 40A(2)(b) is not maintainable when both the payer and payee are assessed at the maximum marginal rate, as it results in a revenue-neutral situation.

Kar.) 2. DIT(E) vs. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust (249 ITR 533) (Bom.) 3. CIT v. Red Rose School (

224 ITR 358 · High Court

citing judgments

Income received by a trust that is considered 'extra fees' is taxable at the maximum marginal rate, while other income of the trust is eligible for exemption under Section 11.

Araadhya Jain Trust v. ITO

173 Taxmann.com 343 · 2025 · ITAT

citing judgments

The definition of maximum marginal rate under section 2(29C) can be interpreted to determine the applicable surcharge rates, particularly for income including dividends, as per the First Schedule to the Finance Act. This affects how surcharge is calculated on taxable income.

Judgments citing maximum marginal rate

Indian Dental Association, Vasco vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(4), Panaji

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 157/PAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji25 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos. 156,157 & 158/Pan/2024 (A.Y.2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23 ) Indian Dental Association, Vs Ito-Ward-2(4), Shop.No.1,First Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, . Karma Point, Edc, Patto, Vasco-De-Gama, Panjim, Goa-403802. Goa-403001. . Pan No:Aaaai1897E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 167B

order of the CIT(A) 2 ITA. No.156,157&158/PAN/2024 Indian Dental Association. sustaining the action of the assessing officer in applying the Maximum Marginal Rate. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a A.O.P and has filed the return of income ... return of income was processed under u/sec143(1) of the Act assessing the total income of Rs.7.85,570/- taxed at the Maximum Marginal Rate vide order dated 25-11-2021.Subsequently the assessee has filed the rectification petitions u/sec154 of the Act. Whereas the CPC has rejected the claim vide rectification order u/sec

Indian Dental Association, Vasco vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(4), Panaji

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 156/PAN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji25 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Section 167B

Nathiben Kalidas Patel Family Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 190/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 190/Ahd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22) बनाम/ Nathiben Kalidas Patel The Ito Ward 1(3)(1), Ahmedabad Family Trust Vs. 18, Mehsana Society, Nava Wadaj, Ahmedabad, Gujarat "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatn2569D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ars. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/04/2025 25/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir VoraFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(b)Section 160Section 161Section 164Section 250

NFAC, [CIT(A)], Delhi (for short CIT(A)" upholding the adjustment made u/s 143(1)(b) by CPC of charging tax @ maximum Marginal Rate instead of normal rate, though the appellant was the only discretionary Trust under the WILL of Late Nathiben Kalidas Patel is wholly illegal, unlawful and against ... appreciating that the appellant Trust was the only discretionary Trust under the WILL of Late Nathiben Kalidas Patel so that charging tax maximum Marginal Rate instead of normal rate was wholly illegal and unlawful. 2.2 That the in the facts and circumstances of the ld. CITIA), ought not to have

Anu Aga Family Discretioneary Trust, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2217/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1259/Pun/2024 & 2217/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2022-23 & 2023-24 Anu Aga Family Discretionary V The Income Tax Officer, Trust, S Ward-7(1), Pune. 501, Marvel Alina, Lane No.5, Koregaon Park, Pune - 411001. Pan: Aafta4748N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Ch Naniwadekar – Ar Revenue By Shri P R Mane & Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr(S) Date Of Hearing 23/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Add./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Gurugram Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 17.05.2024 For A.Y.2022-23 & 26.08.2024 For A.Y.2023-24 Respectively. For The

Section 111Section 111ASection 112ASection 143(1)Section 2Section 250

surcharge while processing the return u/s 143(1). 2. In confirming that the since the appellant is liable to pay tax at maximum marginal rate, the applicable rate of surcharge is 15% only for income covered u/s 111A, 112A and dividend income and for all other income the applicable rate ... appeal at the time of hearing.” Brief facts of the case : 2. The Assessee is private Discretionary Trust liable to pay Tax at Maximum Marginal Rate. The assessee has filed its Return of ITA Nos.1259/PUN/2024 & ITA No.2217/PUN/2024 [A] Income for A.Y.2022-23 electronically. The Return of Income was processed u/s.143

Anu Aga Family Discretionary Trust, Pune vs. ITO Ward 7(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1259/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Section 111Section 111ASection 112ASection 143(1)Section 2Section 250

Swati Sarawagi Family Trust, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2433/KOL/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 164(1)Section 167BSection 234BSection 250

submissions made have been examined. The Ld. AR contended that even though the assessee is a private specific Trust and the maximum marginal rate of tax was applicable, however, the surcharge was to be applied as per the Finance Act and depending upon the quantum of income. Since the assessee

Swati Sarawagi Family Trust, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2432/KOL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 164(1)Section 167BSection 234BSection 250

Anmol Trust, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer 1(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 656/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 656/Pun/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2023-2024 Vs Ito 1(1), Pune Anmol Trust, 203, Turning Point, Viman Nagar, Pune- 411014 Maharashtra Pan-Aafta8612B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajat SoniFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250

made on debatable issues and therefore, the impugned intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act computing the Maximum Marginal Rate of Tax @42.74% [tax @30% (+) surcharge 37% (+) cess 24%] as against 31.20% [tax 30% (+) cess @4%) is bad-n-law and liable to be quashed; 3. failed ... below the threshold for application of surcharge; 6. without prejudice to the above, ought to have restricted the Maximum Marginal Rate of Tax to 35.88% [tax @30% (+) surcharge @15% (+) cess @4%] since the Appellant's income consisted solely of dividend Income on which surcharge is capped @15% in terms

Shri Digamber Jain Mumukshu Mandal, Dehradun vs. DDIT, Bangaluru

Appeal is dismissed in above terms subject to all just exceptions

ITA 61/DDN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)

sole substantive grievance canvassed in the instant appeal seeks to reverse both the lower authorities impugned action 2 Digamber Jain Mumukshu Mandal applying maximum marginal rate as against normal one; for the purpose of computation, claimed at it’s behest. 4. Learned Sr. Departmental Representative invites our attention to page

Aastitva Jain Family Trust, Ashoknagar vs. The Income Tax Officer CPC Bengaluru, CPC Bengaluru

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 413/AGR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Jain (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)

appeal before us. 2. The Ld. AR stated that the assessee is a private discretionary trust and CPC has wrongly calculated tax at Maximum Marginal Rate. The Ld. AR referred to the order of Agra Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2015-16 vide ITA No. 88/Agr/2024 dated

Mahalaxmi Construction Co, Mumbai vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4060/MUM/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 255(3)

income for the A.Y. 2021-22 was filed on 08/10/2021 declaring total income of Rs.92,49,770/-. The assessee computed the tax at maximum marginal rate and also paid surcharge @10% which was applicable for the slab rate of income declared between Rs.50,00,000/- to Rs.1 ... return of income was filed on 23/08/2022 declaring total income of Rs.2,72,68,630/-, the tax was computed at maximum marginal rate and surcharge was calculated at an applicable rate of 25%, i.e., applicable on the slab rate of income declared by the assessee. However, the CPC has computed

Mahalaxmi Construction Co, Bhayandar West vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax CPC Bangeluru, Bangeluru

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4008/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 255(3)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Ballari vs. Ms Al Badar Educational and Charitable Trust, Ballari

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are allowed and the

ITA 1483/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

Section 12ASection 133ASection 143(1)Section 164(2)

unaccounted money received by the assessee on account of capitation fees from the innocent students and hence the AO taxed these receipt at maximum marginal rate as per the provisions of section 164(2) of the Income Tax Act. 4. Aggrieved from the order of the AO, the assessee filed

Lintas Employees Recreation Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 25(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 32/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2

that the ld. CIT(A) has erred of levying surcharge on the tax in the hands of the assessee as a result of maximum marginal rate despite the income was much below limit of Rs.50,00,000/- prescribed under the relevant Finance Act. 3. The brief facts are that assessee ... liability by applying surcharge @37% on the total tax payable. The ld. CIT(A) held that it is an undisputed fact that maximum marginal rate is to be applied and tax and surcharge has to calculated as per the provision of Section 2(29C) of the Act r.w.s. 164 / 167B

Lintas Employees Recreation Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 25(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 31/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2

Sanjiv Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

ITA 1376/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vasanti B. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 234CSection 250

assessee and upheld the levy of surcharge at the rate of 37% on the basis that once the assessee is taxable at the maximum marginal rate the applicable surcharge will also be the surcharge for the highest slab only. In support of the aforesaid conclusion, the learned Addl./Joint ... this issue in favour of the assessee and held that in case of Private Discretionary Trusts, whose income is chargeable to tax at maximum marginal rate, surcharge has to be computed on income tax having reference to slab rates prescribed in Finance Act under heading 'surcharge on income

Sanjiv Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

ITA 1375/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vasanti B. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 234CSection 250

B B M B Welfare Society, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward, Chandigarh

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for

ITA 732/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.732/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Trehan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 164Section 164(3)

upholding the action of the ITA No. 732/Chd-2024 A.Y. 2019-20 2 Assessing Officer of charging the assessee Trust/Society at maximum marginal rate of tax. 3. A perusal of the impugned order of the CIT(A) revealed that the ld. CIT(A) has relied upon the provision of Section

ACIT, Circlle-34, Kolkata vs. Subhas Kumar Kedia, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1677/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1677/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Acit, Circle-34, Kolkata Vs Subhas Kumar Kedia, 41, N.S.Road, Kolkata Pan No. :Afnpk 9669 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Shreya Loyalka, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 05.06.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- I) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order U/S.148A(D) & All Subsequent Proceedings. Ii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Failed To Acknowledge The Fact That The Assesse Had Not Expressed Any Grievance Against The Validity Of Order U/S 148A(D) By Moving Any Writ Petition Which Should Have Been Done In Case Of Any Grievance After Getting The Sald Order U/S.148A(D). Iii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order When The Ld. Cit(A) Has No Jurisdiction To Deal With The Question Whether The 148A(D) Order Was Passed Validly Or Properly As An Order U/S.148A(D) Is Not An Appealable Order Before Ld. Cit(A) As Per Section 246A.

For Appellant: Ms. Shreya Loyalka, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR

Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 246ASection 3Section 69A

profit of Rs. 16,64,106/- and not Rs. 13,68,850/- as alleged. He stated that he had paid tax at maximum marginal rate 1.e.30% plus surcharge on Rs. 16,64,106/- and the transactions of Rs. 13,68,850/- are already included in transaction

Sree Balaji Bullions, Salem vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Salem

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2302/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2302/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sree Balaji Bullions, Dy. Commissioner Of 22/43, Vasagasalai, Income Tax, Shevapet, V. Circle 1(1), Salem– 636002. Salem. [Pan: Aasfs-5947-E] (""यथ"/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : Shri.S.Sridhar, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By & N.Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

For Respondent: Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, CIT

Section 115BSection 69A

treated as unexplained and unaccounted money in the hands of the assessee u/s. 69A of the I.T. Act and taxed the same at maximum marginal rate invoking section 115BBE or the 1.T. Act, by relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following cases as discussed