← 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

Sitaram Narayandas Patel (Deceased) by His Legal Heir Ashok S Patel, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 22(3) at Present Jurisdiction With ACIT Circle 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 901/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 901/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 900/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) बिधम/ Sitaram Narayandas Patel Acit, Circle-22(3) (Deceased) By His Legal Heir At Present Jurisdiction With Vs. Ashok Patel Acit, Circle-22(1) Plot No. 91, Ambey Vila, Piramal Chamber Lalbaug, Next To Grant Hyatt, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Vakola Bridge, Shivaji Nagar, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400055. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakpp6860D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Madhuri Tambe Revenue By: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 08.02.2023 For Ay. 2014-15 & Order Dated 09.02.2023 For Ay. 2015-16. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee For Ay 2014-15, Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit (A) Confirming The Action Of The Ao Disallowing An Amount Of Rs.1,00,00,000/- [Donations Of Rs.75 Lakhs Paid To M/S. Sahara Health & Education Society (Hereinafter “M/S. Sahara Health”) & Rs.25 Lakhs Paid To M/S. Tulsi Gramudyog Seva

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Madhuri TambeFor Respondent: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad (Sr. AR)
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 35A

donee) shall be deemed to be income of such institution (donee) and tax shall be charged on such income at the maximum marginal rate in force for the year. Thus according to the Ld. AR, when assessee is entitled to deduction (on fulfilment of condition), it cannot be denied merely

Sitaram Narayandas Patel(Deceased) by His Legal Heir Ashok S. Patel, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 22(3) at Present Jurisdiction With ACIT Circle 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 900/MUM/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 901/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 900/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) बिधम/ Sitaram Narayandas Patel Acit, Circle-22(3) (Deceased) By His Legal Heir At Present Jurisdiction With Vs. Ashok Patel Acit, Circle-22(1) Plot No. 91, Ambey Vila, Piramal Chamber Lalbaug, Next To Grant Hyatt, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Vakola Bridge, Shivaji Nagar, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400055. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakpp6860D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Madhuri Tambe Revenue By: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 08.02.2023 For Ay. 2014-15 & Order Dated 09.02.2023 For Ay. 2015-16. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee For Ay 2014-15, Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit (A) Confirming The Action Of The Ao Disallowing An Amount Of Rs.1,00,00,000/- [Donations Of Rs.75 Lakhs Paid To M/S. Sahara Health & Education Society (Hereinafter “M/S. Sahara Health”) & Rs.25 Lakhs Paid To M/S. Tulsi Gramudyog Seva

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Madhuri TambeFor Respondent: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad (Sr. AR)
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 35A

donee) shall be deemed to be income of such institution (donee) and tax shall be charged on such income at the maximum marginal rate in force for the year. Thus according to the Ld. AR, when assessee is entitled to deduction (on fulfilment of condition), it cannot be denied merely

Shri Parnami Panchayat, Jaipur vs. ITO, (Exemptions), Ward-1, Jaipur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev sogani (C.A) &For Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 11Section 12ASection 234B

addition of surplus of Rs. 22,97,578/- to the income of assessee in status of A. O. P. and charging tax at Maximum Marginal Rate. The said finding is illegal & unjustified. The assessee was not liable for payment of any tax on surplus as he was entitled to benefit ... action is illegal & unjustified. 3. That action of lower authorities in treating surplus of Rs. 22,97,578/- as income & charging tax at Maximum Marginal Rate is illegal & unjustified. 4. That charging of interest Under Section 234B is illegal.” 2.1. Apropos Ground Nos. 1 to 3 of the assessee, brief

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The ITO -1 (5), Bhopal

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 10/IND/2023[22014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Essargee Construction Ito 1(5) Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal Vs. A-10, Mezenine Floor Essarjee House Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaace 8852F Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03.08.2023

Section 40Section 40A(3)

these three directors are at Rs.75,07,380/-. Even it is accepted position that the directors have paid taxes on these remunerations on maximum margin rate and there is no revenue loss to the Department. In view of the above, we are of the view that in the absence ... allow the appeal of assessee.” 30. It is matter of record that two of the directors are paying income tax at the maximum marginal rate and therefore, there is no revenue loss on this account. Accordingly in the facts and circumstances as discussed above and in view of the decision

Dhamandas Dodeja Family Trust, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CPC(A0-Ward 3(1), Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1679/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2017-2018
Section 143(1)Section 160Section 164Section 164(1)Section 234

raised the following grounds:- 2 M/s. Dhamandas Dodeja Family Trust “1.The Learned Assessing Officer (DCIT CPC) erred in assessing the Appellant trust at maximum marginal rate @ 30% us. 164 (1) instead of rates applicable under the proviso (ii) to Sec. 164(1). 2. In the facts and the circumstances ... 05/08/2017. Vde intimation u/s. 143(1) dt. 06/05/2018 the CPC, Bangalore has assessed the assessee trust at maximum marginal rate of Income Tax u/s 164 of Income Tax Act along with tax demand of Rs. 2,15,067/-. 4. Before the ld. CIT (A) assessee had filed detailed submission stating

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

ITA 9/IND/2023[22013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40A(3)

that the disallowance made by the AO is not justified. He has further submitted that the directors are also paying the tax as maximum marginal rate 30% except one director Ms. Meenu Gupta. He has relied upon the decision of the Chennai Benches of the Tribunal dated 18.05.2022 in case ... these three directors are at Rs.75,07,380/-. Even it is accepted position that the directors have paid taxes on these remunerations on maximum margin rate and there is no revenue loss to the Department. In view of the above, we are of the view that in the absence

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The DCIT- 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

ITA 8/IND/2023[22012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40A(3)

that the disallowance made by the AO is not justified. He has further submitted that the directors are also paying the tax as maximum marginal rate 30% except one director Ms. Meenu Gupta. He has relied upon the decision of the Chennai Benches of the Tribunal dated 18.05.2022 in case ... these three directors are at Rs.75,07,380/-. Even it is accepted position that the directors have paid taxes on these remunerations on maximum margin rate and there is no revenue loss to the Department. In view of the above, we are of the view that in the absence

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

ITA 7/IND/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40A(3)

that the disallowance made by the AO is not justified. He has further submitted that the directors are also paying the tax as maximum marginal rate 30% except one director Ms. Meenu Gupta. He has relied upon the decision of the Chennai Benches of the Tribunal dated 18.05.2022 in case ... these three directors are at Rs.75,07,380/-. Even it is accepted position that the directors have paid taxes on these remunerations on maximum margin rate and there is no revenue loss to the Department. In view of the above, we are of the view that in the absence

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The DCIT- 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

ITA 6/IND/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40A(3)

that the disallowance made by the AO is not justified. He has further submitted that the directors are also paying the tax as maximum marginal rate 30% except one director Ms. Meenu Gupta. He has relied upon the decision of the Chennai Benches of the Tribunal dated 18.05.2022 in case ... these three directors are at Rs.75,07,380/-. Even it is accepted position that the directors have paid taxes on these remunerations on maximum margin rate and there is no revenue loss to the Department. In view of the above, we are of the view that in the absence

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The DCIT-1 (1), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

ITA 11/IND/2023[22015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40A(3)

that the disallowance made by the AO is not justified. He has further submitted that the directors are also paying the tax as maximum marginal rate 30% except one director Ms. Meenu Gupta. He has relied upon the decision of the Chennai Benches of the Tribunal dated 18.05.2022 in case ... these three directors are at Rs.75,07,380/-. Even it is accepted position that the directors have paid taxes on these remunerations on maximum margin rate and there is no revenue loss to the Department. In view of the above, we are of the view that in the absence

ACIT, Circle- 8(1), New Delhi vs. Earthline Apparels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6475/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

also gone through the competition of income of the M/s Aero Club and found it to be a tax paying company at maximum marginal rate. Hence, the revenue’s allegation that the sale is a diversion of profit of scheme cannot be given any credence. Hence, keeping in view

Mohammedally Noorbhoy Bandukwalla Trust, Mumbai vs. Add/Joint/Deputy/ACIT/ITO, NFAC, Delhi

ITA 721/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Mohammedally Noorbhoy Bandukwalla Trust Bhiwandiwala Terrace, J S S Ito, Nfac Delhi Road, Next To Parsi Fire Temple, Estate, Delhi, Metro Cinema, Shop No. 1, Vs. Delhi-110002 Block A, 626 Dhobi Talao Marine Lines(E), Mumbai-400002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatm0718K Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal & Shri Om Kadalgaokar, Ars Revenue By : Shri P. D. Chougule, Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal &For Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule, DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 164(2)Section 3

erred in disregarding the provisions of section 164(2) of the Act, by upholding though indirectly the charge of income tax at maximum Marginal Rate of 30% instead of normal Tax Rate for AOP albeit inadvertently. 4. The Appellant reserves the right to add, to alter, to amend the grounds ... return has considered the status of the assessee as Association of Persons (AOP) trust without any change and computed the tax liability applying maximum marginal rate u/s 143(1) (b) of The Act. Thus, only dispute was that whether the assessee trust can be taxed at the normal rate applicable

Shree Hazarimal Somani Memorial Trust, Mumbai vs. ACIT Exemption Cir 2, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 104/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal,Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.104, 2297 & 2298/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade, Ld. DR
Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

applicable. Further section 164(2) and 164(3) provided that income of the trust would be taxable at a maximum marginal rate, which reads as under:- “[(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes, or which ... section (1) of section 13, tax shall be charged on the relevant income or part of relevant income at the maximum marginal rate. (3) In a case where the relevant income is derived from property held under trust in part only for charitable or religious purposes

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi vs. Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6707/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. B. R. R. Kumaraddl. Cit, Vs. Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd, 1St Floor, Plot No. 8, Elegance Special Range-1, New Delhi Tower, Jasola, New Delhi -110025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaca5603Q Assessee By : Sh. Sudesh Garg, Adv Sh. Prince Bansal, Ca Ms. Bhavya Garg, Ca Revenue By: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 16/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 32Section 37(1)

which it is observed that the appellant has shown positive profit in all these years and has been paying the tax at the maximum marginal rate. By doing so, the AR has contended that the claim is revenue neutral with respect to the year of claim. Based on these facts

ACIT, Circle (Exemption), Jodhpur vs. M/S. Vidya Bhawan Society, Udaipur

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

ITA 325/JODH/2019[ 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Boradacit, Vs M/S. Vidya Bhawan Circle (Exemption), Society, Mohan Singh, Jodhpur Mehta Marg, Fatehpur, Udaipur (Raj.) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Assessee By Shri Amit Kothari, Ca Revenue By Shri S.M.Joshi, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/03/2023 Date Of 24/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Kul Bharat, J.M.: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Udaipur Dated 27.06.2019. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

reading sec. 164(2), it will disentitle the benefits on the portion of the income attributable to impermissible securities to be taxed at maximum marginal rates after applying other provisions of the Act? 4.5 In our considered view the provisions of secs ... shall be 6 | P a g e charged on the relevant income or part of the relevant income at the maximum marginal rate. CBDT Circular No. 387, dated July 6, 1984, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes [152 ITR (St.) 1] also supports this proposition. Section

Mandir Shree Amrit Raghunathji, Jaipur vs. ITO, I.T.O. (Exemption) Jaipur

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

ITA 407/JPR/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mirza Azhar Beign, JCIT
Section 12A(2)Section 154

appeal) and not electronically, thereby denying the benefit under second proviso to Section 12A(2) of I.T. Act by charging tax at maximum marginal rate on surplus. 2. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1(above), the ld. CIT(A) has erred in denying justice to the assessee trust

Sree Narayana Gurudeva Trust., Thrissur vs. The ACIT, CPC, Thrissur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 31/COCH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Jojo, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 250

assesse is a trust having 12A registration and is eligible to be taxed at normal rates, A.O computed the tax liability at Maximum Marginal Rate which is inequitable. 3. Hence an appeal was filed to CIT (Appeals) on 24/04/2015 against the assessment order dated 22.01.2015, passed ... liability of Rs.2,18,568/- and an interest of Rs.48,155/- thereon. In the above order CIT(A) also calculated tax liability at Maximum Marginal Rate which is unfair and not as per the Act. As the assessee being an AOP(Trust) having 12A registration ,tax liability should be calculated

Air Force Navy Farm Owners Welfare Association, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward -1(1), Noida

ITA 1992/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1992/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 बनाम Air Force Navy Farm Owners Ito Welfare Association, Vs. Ward 1(1) C-2/52, Sector-31, Noida, Noida. Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aaaja0972B अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 167ASection 167BSection 2(31)

While completing the assessment the Assessing Officer determined the status of the assessee as AOP and the interest income was taxed at maximum marginal rate. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) contending that assessee society is an Artificial Juridical Person (AJP) and is a mutual benefit ... Before us the only limited point made by the Id. counsel Ms. Sumangala Saxena is that the Id. Assessing Officer while applying the maximum marginal rate after invoking provision of section 167B has failed to consider the fact that under the said provision itself, exception has been carved

Parab Maratha Samaj, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1821/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1821/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Parab Maratha Samaj, Nfac, Delhi बिधम/ 10, 5Th Floor Mahohar Bldg, Priti Kanha, Chitable Path, Vs. Dadar(W), Mumbai-400 028 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaatp4197P (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Dinesh Shah, Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Neeta Jeph, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01.09.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 09.05.2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) For Ay 2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Neeta Jeph, Ld. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

seen that AO has taxed and completed the assessment at an income of Rs. 3,22,294/- at a maximum marginal rate (MMR) of 30%. Though, AO was correct in holding that assessee cannot claim the benefit of section 11 in absence of registration u/s 12A, because 6 I.T.A ... Before me, Ld. Counsel had made two fold arguments; firstly, the expenses debited in the income and expenditure account should be allowed and maximum marginal rate should not be applied. Secondly, he submitted that provision of section 164(2) of the Act will not apply in the case

DCIT Cent. Cir-2(3), Mumbai vs. Soma Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1818/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2022AY 2017-18
Section 127(2)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

manner provided in section 67A: Provided that- a) Where the association or body is chargeable to tax on its total income at the maximum marginal rate or any higher rate under any of the provisions of this Act, the share of a member computed as aforesaid shall not be included