← All Phrases

“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
86
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
61
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
46
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
34
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
27
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
22
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
22
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

Clestra Foundation, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1478/BANG/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Nov 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra T., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for department
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 161Section 164Section 164ASection 167BSection 2Section 250Section 3

Income below Rs.50 lakhs. Clestra Foundation, Bangalore Page 2 of 14 3. The learned CPC erred in interpreting Section 2(29C) by levying Maximum marginal rate on the whole of the Income which was against the judicial precedent in [2003] 1 SOT 579 (Hyderabad) [01-02-2001] Income Tax Officer ... appeal before the ADDL/JCIT(A). 3. The ld. ADDL/JCIT(A) held that the submission of the assessee is not acceptable as the Maximum Marginal Rate (in short “MMR”) for the AY 2023-24 is 42.74% and the rates of taxation provided in the first schedule Part-I of Finance

Shree Siddhivinayak Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 26(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4101/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year 2023-24 Shree Siddhivinayak Trust, The Income Tax Officer– 26(2)(1), 6-D, Prem Kutir, Kautilya Bhavan, Marine Drive, Vs. Bkc,Bandra East, Mumbai Mumbai Pan : Aajpm7805N (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Haresh Shah For Revenue : Shri Asif Karmali, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 25-09-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024 Order Per B.R. Baskaran, A.M : The Assessee Has Filed This Appealchallenging The Order Dt. 20-06- 2024 Passed By The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata [„Ld.Cit(A)‟] & It Relates To Ay. 2023-24. The Only Issue Urged In This Appeal Is Related To The Rate Of Surcharge That Could Be Levied On The Income Tax Computed In The Hands Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Haresh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2

determined.Hence in terms of section 164 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟), the assessee is liable to pay income tax at maximum marginal rate. The maximum marginal rate of Income tax was 30% for the year under consideration. The assessee declared a total 2 income of Rs.38 ... being dividend income received from the Indian companies. The assessee computed tax on the above said income by applying maximum marginal rate of 30%. However, the assessee did not compute surcharge thereon, apparently on the reasoning that the surcharge is not leviable on the total income of less than Rs.50.00

Kapur Family Trust, Mumbai vs. I.T.O Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, we confirm the order of the ld

ITA 3835/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Dadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Santosh Kumar, Sr. A.R
Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 2Section 250

provisions of law. 6. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It is not in controversy that the maximum marginal rate is applicable to the Assessee’s declared income, on which the CPC has levied the surcharge @ 37% which has been affirmed ... Addl./Joint Commissioner. It is also admitted fact that according to the definition as prescribed u/s 2(29C) of the Act, maximum marginal rate is specified, which means the rate of tax (including surcharge on income tax, if any) applicable in relation to the highest slab

Kapur Family Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward, 22(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, we confirm the order of the ld

ITA 3834/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Dadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Santosh Kumar, Sr. A.R
Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 2Section 250

provisions of law. 6. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It is not in controversy that the maximum marginal rate is applicable to the Assessee’s declared income, on which the CPC has levied the surcharge @ 37% which has been affirmed ... Addl./Joint Commissioner. It is also admitted fact that according to the definition as prescribed u/s 2(29C) of the Act, maximum marginal rate is specified, which means the rate of tax (including surcharge on income tax, if any) applicable in relation to the highest slab

Sarvajanik Seva Trust, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-26(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee Trust is allowed

ITA 1946/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar Syal and Shri Atul SuraiyaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR
Section 115TSection 12ASection 143(1)Section 234A

Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act') and applying provisions of section 115TD of the Act and charging the tax at Maximum Marginal Rate on accreted income despite the fact that provision of section 115TD of the Act was introduced by Finance Act 2016, w.e.f. 01.06.2016 and the registration of the Trust ... surrendered on 20.03.2015. The said Intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act erroneously calculates: a) Tax at maximum marginal rate of 30% on the total income of the Appellant resulting into a total tax of Rs 15,02,532/- instead of Rs 13,15,032/-returned by the Appellant

Iei Shareholding (Recreational Facilities -1992) Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4545/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: Shri Balaji ChettiarFor Respondent: Shri Avinash Karpe
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Processing Centre (CPC), vide its order (intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act) dated 26.10.2022 has taxed the income of the trust at Maximum Marginal Rate, while the assessee Trust contends that the same should be taxed at slab rates. 2 ITA Nos.4545, 3580 & 3581/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2022-23) IEI Shareholding

Iei Shareholding Recreation Facilities 1991 Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3581/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: Shri Balaji ChettiarFor Respondent: Shri Avinash Karpe
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Processing Centre (CPC), vide its order (intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act) dated 26.10.2022 has taxed the income of the trust at Maximum Marginal Rate, while the assessee Trust contends that the same should be taxed at slab rates. 2 ITA Nos.4545, 3580 & 3581/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2022-23) IEI Shareholding

Iei Shareholding Cultural Activities 1985 Trust, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3580/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

For Appellant: Shri Balaji ChettiarFor Respondent: Shri Avinash Karpe
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Processing Centre (CPC), vide its order (intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act) dated 26.10.2022 has taxed the income of the trust at Maximum Marginal Rate, while the assessee Trust contends that the same should be taxed at slab rates. 2 ITA Nos.4545, 3580 & 3581/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2022-23) IEI Shareholding

Mother Theressa Educational Society, Amalapuram vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 270ASection 274Section 80G

stating that the assessee has mis-reported income by computing the tax on the amount disallowed as depreciation and subjected it to the maximum marginal rate and levied the Page No. 7 I.T.A. Nos. 163&229/VIZ/2024 C.O. No. 01/VIZ/2024 Mother Theressa Educational Society penalty 200% on the amount

ACIT, Exemption Circle, Vijayawada vs. Mother Theressa Educational Society, Chaitanyanagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 163/VIZ/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 270ASection 274Section 80G

stating that the assessee has mis-reported income by computing the tax on the amount disallowed as depreciation and subjected it to the maximum marginal rate and levied the Page No. 7 I.T.A. Nos. 163&229/VIZ/2024 C.O. No. 01/VIZ/2024 Mother Theressa Educational Society penalty 200% on the amount

Dilip Sampat Navneet Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax Ward, 22(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2486/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay ParikhFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(1)Section 2(29)Section 250

vide order dated 29.03.2024 upheld the surcharge levied by the ld. A.O./CPC on the ground that the maximum marginal rate is applicable in the case of the assessee, for which the surcharge @ 37% is attracted for maximum marginal rate @ 42.74% for the year under consideration. 8. Aggrieved the assessee ... income is less than Rs.50 lacs. The ld. CIT(A) has contended that since the assessee’s tax liability would fall under the maximum marginal rate, surcharge would (A.Ys.2023-24 & 2022-23) be applicable in the case of assessee as per section 2(29) of the Act. The assessee

Jitendra Gala Navneet Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax Ward, 22(1)(6), Mumbai

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

ITA 2485/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay ParikhFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(1)Section 2(29)Section 250

vide order dated 29.03.2024 upheld the surcharge levied by the ld. A.O./CPC on the ground that the maximum marginal rate is applicable in the case of the assessee, for which the surcharge @ 37% is attracted for maximum marginal rate @ 42.74% for the year under consideration. 8. Aggrieved the assessee ... income is less than Rs.50 lacs. The ld. CIT(A) has contended that since the assessee’s tax liability would fall under the maximum marginal rate, surcharge would (A.Ys.2023-24 & 2022-23) be applicable in the case of assessee as per section 2(29) of the Act. The assessee

Jitendra Gala Novneet Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax Ward, 22(1)(6), Mumbai

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

ITA 2484/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay ParikhFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(1)Section 2(29)Section 250

vide order dated 29.03.2024 upheld the surcharge levied by the ld. A.O./CPC on the ground that the maximum marginal rate is applicable in the case of the assessee, for which the surcharge @ 37% is attracted for maximum marginal rate @ 42.74% for the year under consideration. 8. Aggrieved the assessee ... income is less than Rs.50 lacs. The ld. CIT(A) has contended that since the assessee’s tax liability would fall under the maximum marginal rate, surcharge would (A.Ys.2023-24 & 2022-23) be applicable in the case of assessee as per section 2(29) of the Act. The assessee

Vivek Shiksha Samiti, Jaipur vs. ITO, Exemption - 1, Jaipur

In the result ground no. 2 raised by the assessee stands

ITA 1134/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1134 & 1135/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Vivek Shiksha Samiti Jobner Road, Kalwar, VIA Jhotwara, Jaipur. cuke Vs. The ITO, Exemption-1, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTV0361Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Gatum Singh Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Gatum Singh Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 143(1)

assessee is that the CPC, while processing the respective year return charged the tax on the income of the assessee at Maximum Marginal Rate [ for short “MMR” ]. Even the ld. CIT(A) did not considered the contentions of the assessee trust. 3.1 ITA No. 1134/JPR/2024 relates to the assessment year ... imparting education. The income returned was accepted by the CPC but while doing so CPC intimated that the tax to be paid at Maximum Marginal Rate [MMR] thereby resulting into Vivek Shiksha Samiti vs. ITO (E) a net demand of Rs. 2,02,220/-. The intimation was processed

Madhurika Educational & Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed

ITA 641/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.641/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2010-11 Madhurika Educational & Asst. Director Of Income Tax Charitable Trust, Vs. (Exemptions)-Iv, No.11, Millers Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-34 Chennai-600010. [Pan: Aaatm8627M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059541811(1) Dated 10.01.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2010- 11. Through The Aforesaid Appeal The Assesse Has Challenged Order U/S 250 Dated 10.01.2024 Passed By Nfac, Delhi. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(C)Section 13(3)(cc)Section 13(3)(d)Section 164(3)Section 250

officer invoked 3rd provision to section 164(3) of the Income Tax Act and taxed the balance sum of Rs.30,40,000/- at Maximum Marginal Rate. It was further submitted that the appellant had paid total sum of Rs.21,30,000/- P.A as remuneration to Smt. Tarangi S Vakil which ... officer invoked 3rd provision to section 164(3) of the Income Tax Act and taxed the balance sum of Rs.15,30,000/- at Maximum Marginal Rate. 3.2 The Ld. Counsel for the assesse argued that the addition of excess remuneration paid to Shri Sanjeev S, Vakil, (Managing Director

Executor to Estate of Amirali J. Dossa, S V Road Andheri West vs. ITO 23(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 619/MUM/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2024AY 2022-2023

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Smt Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Mayur A. Shah (Executor)For Respondent: Shri Dharamveer D. Yadav — Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250

appeal: 1) “The CIT(A) NFAC erred in holding that the AO was justified in taxing the appellant to tax at the maximum marginal rate applicable to an AOP as against his obligation to charge the AOP to tax as an Individual. It is prayed that the AO be directed ... behind, therefore, the estate account continued for the sole beneficiary, being minor son of the late Mr. Amirali J. Dossa. The CPC applied maximum marginal rate on AOP u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act against which the assessee filed the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated

Panchayti Dharamshala Kaseran Trust, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 1177/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sandep Gosain & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 12Section 143(1)Section 234Section 234ASection 246

facts of the case in confirming the action of the Id. AO in taxing the income of assessee on the basis of Maximum Marginal Rate (MMR) on the total income in place of normal rate as applicable as per law in the present case and erred in raising the demand ... Dharamshala Kaseran Trust v. ITO 3. The sole issue challenged in the grounds is regarding taxing of Returned Income of Assessee Trust under "Maximum Marginal Rate" in place of normal rate bedises levy of interest U/s 234 A, B, C & D of the Act. 4. The appellant assessee has filed

Mailam Subramaniya Educational Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle 3(3), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1237/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1237/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Dcit बनाम/ Educational Trust Central Circle-3(3) 54, Meenatchi Nagar, Poonthottam Chennai. Vs. Villupuram-605 602. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatm-3311-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri J. Prabhakar (Fca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-09-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri J. Prabhakar (FCA)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 13(1)(c)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 161(2)Section 164Section 164(2)Section 263

trustees which was claimed as application in the computation of total income by the assessee and assess the said amount at maximum marginal rate (MMR). Pursuant to the same, consequential order has been passed by Ld. AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 03-04-2024 wherein the remuneration

Sri Manakula Vinayaga Educational Trust, Puducherry vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(3), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1236/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1236/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sri Manakula Vinayaga Educational Trust Dcit बनाम/ 24, Mariamman Koil Street, Madagadipet, Central Circle-3(3) Vs. Puducherry-605 107. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatm-9599-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri J. Prabhakar (Fca) - Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-09-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri J. Prabhakar (FCA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 161(2)Section 164Section 164(2)Section 263

trustees which was claimed as application in the computation of total income by the assessee and assess the said amount at maximum marginal rate (MMR). Pursuant to the same, consequential order has been passed by Ld. AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 03-04-2024 wherein the remuneration

Income Tax Officer, Bibikulam Madurai vs. D N Public Charitable Trust, Arasaradi Madurai Tamil Nadu

In the result, Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly

ITA 1304/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Samuel Pitta, JCIT
Section 1Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(e)Section 147

utilizing the trust property Siemens Somatom Defination AS Excel Edition 128 Slice Spiral CT Scanner and the same is charged to tax at maximum marginal rate as per the proviso to section 164(2) of the I.T. Act. And thereafter, the AO estimated the compensation for using/utilizing the CT Scanner ... compensation from the company and therefore, he invoked section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(2)(b) and levied tax at maximum marginal rate. 5.4 The assessee contended before the assessing officer that even though the Siemens CT Scanner was installed in the premises of the company to meet