NANDLAL TOLANI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed is dismissed in the above terms

section 11(2) should also be allowed as per tax Taxable Income as per Page | 7 ITA No. 113/Mum/2024 and ITA No. 650/Mum/2024 Nandlal Tolani Charitable Trust; A.Y. 2014-15 and A.Y. 2015-16 the Assessment Order and not the amount shown in Form No. 10 filed. It is further contended that the Ld. AO erred in not allowing deduction

OBEROI FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (E), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleoberoi Foundation V. Cit (Exemptions) Commerz, 3Rd Floor 6Th Floor, Piramal Chambers International Business Park Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400 012 Oberoi Garden City, Off. W.E. Highway Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 400063 Pan: Aaato1684L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vijay Mehta Department Represented By : Shri K.C. Salvamani

section 11 is applicable in the case of entities which claims deductions u/s 23C of the Act. 9 Oberoi Foundation 12. It is brought to our notice that the assessee has specifically submitted the details of payment of rent before Assessing Officer and even Assessing Officer has verified the same while verifying the compliance of TDS

ST. JOSEPH'S EDUCATION AND MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY ,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX -(E)-II(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee for all the years\nunder consideration stands allowed

Section\nSchool\n6.\nJyoti Nivas\nManor\nBoarding,\nHealth,\nEducation\n7.\nKrupa Prasad\nNashik\nBoarding,\nHealth,\nEducation\n8.\nAnand Ashram Convent\nPalghar\nBoarding,\nHealth,\nEducation\n9.\nSt. Joseph's Convent\nPanchgani\nSchool, Boarding\n10.\nNavjeevan Niwas\nUdhwa\nHealth and Education\n11.\nPremankur\nVellugaon\nBoarding,\nHealth and\nEducation\n12.\nPremada\nNakshatra\nYellapur\nBoarding, Health and\nAshram\nEducation\n13.\nSt. Elizabeth Hospital\nMumbai

TATTWAJNANA VIDYAPEETH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (E)-2(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Hon’Ble

section 11(2) of the Act. 11. In the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) upheld theasse 11. In the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) upheld theassessment order by holding ssment order by holding that AO rightly made the additionby relying on the judgment in case of CIT vs. Shree that AO rightly made the additionby relying

TATTWAJNANA VIDYAPEETH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (E)-2(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Hon’Ble

section 11(2) of the Act. 11. In the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) upheld theasse 11. In the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) upheld theassessment order by holding ssment order by holding that AO rightly made the additionby relying on the judgment in case of CIT vs. Shree that AO rightly made the additionby relying

TATTWAJNANA VIDYAPEETH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(E)-2(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Hon’Ble

section 11(2) of the Act. 11. In the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) upheld theasse 11. In the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) upheld theassessment order by holding ssment order by holding that AO rightly made the additionby relying on the judgment in case of CIT vs. Shree that AO rightly made the additionby relying

ASST CIT (E) I(1),MUMBAI vs. INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL TECHNOLOGY, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Lalit Kumar, Jm

section 11(4A), because the 4 ITA No.3808/Mum/2015. Institute of Chemical Technology. business if any being carried out by the appellant is incidental / ancillary to the objects of the appellant trust. So far as maintenance of separate books of account is concerned, the appellant has maintained separate ledger of consultancy fee receipts. Since there is no question of expenses, assets

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

Appeal stands disposed off as partly allowed for statistical purposes

TDS reconciliation submitted by the Appellant for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The aforesaid activities of the Appellant did not qualify as educational activities and income therefrom was, thus, taxable as per Section 11

CREDIT GUARANTEE FUND TRUST FOR MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT EXEMPTION-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarcredit Guarantee Fund Vs. Dcit(E) – 1(1) Trust Mumbai. 1St Floor, Sidbi Swavalaman Bhavan, Avenue – 3, Lane 2, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra (E) Pan/Gir No. Aaatc2613D (Applicant) (Respondent)

section 11(1) (a) of the Act. 5.0 Reg. Ground of Appeal No.5: Short credit of TDS to the extent

NANDLAL TOLANI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEM WARD 2(1), CUMBALLA HILL, MUMBAI

section\n143(3) the Taxable Income has been increased, the accumulation under\nsection 11(2) should also be allowed as per tax Taxable Income as per\nPage | 7\nITA No. 113/Mum/2024\nand ITA No. 650/Mum/2024\nNandlal Tolani Charitable Trust; A.Y. 2014-15 and A.Y. 2015-16\nthe Assessment Order and not the amount shown in Form No. 10 filed

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

11 of the I. T. Act on the basis that the Corporation had been formed for the advancement of an object of general public utility not involving the carrying on any activity for profit. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the apex court in the case of Calcutta State Transport Corporation vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 525, wherein

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

11 of the I. T. Act on the basis that the Corporation had been formed for the advancement of an object of general public utility not involving the carrying on any activity for profit. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the apex court in the case of Calcutta State Transport Corporation vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 525, wherein

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

11 of the I. T. Act on the basis that the Corporation had been formed for the advancement of an object of general public utility not involving the carrying on any activity for profit. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the apex court in the case of Calcutta State Transport Corporation vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 525, wherein

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

11 of the I. T. Act on the basis that the Corporation had been formed for the advancement of an object of general public utility not involving the carrying on any activity for profit. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the apex court in the case of Calcutta State Transport Corporation vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 525, wherein

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

11 of the I. T. Act on the basis that the Corporation had been formed for the advancement of an object of general public utility not involving the carrying on any activity for profit. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the apex court in the case of Calcutta State Transport Corporation vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 525, wherein

GROWMORE EXPORTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 31, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee ‘s appeal for the assessment year 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Ram Lal Negi

TDS and hence on the said amount of tax no interest can be computed u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The appellant craves leave of your Honour to add to, alter, amend and/or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal.” 11. Ground No.1- 11.1 At the outset, the ld. AR for the assessee mentioned

CORNERVIEW CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 9TDS) - CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

TDS statements before the due date of filing of return of income by the deductees for the assessment year 2016–17. 9. Insofar as assessee’s contention regarding applicability of section 194IA of the Act is concerned, we are unable to accept the same due 11

SPRING TIME CLUBS & HOSPITALITY SERVICES P.LTD,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Gargm/S. Sprigtime Clubs & Hospitality Assessing Officer, Tds Ward Services Pvt. Ltd. Rani Mansion, Murbad Road Vs. 2Nd Floor, Sprig Avenue, Club Road Kalyan (W), 421301 Kalyan (W) 421301 Pan – Aaocs9107M Appellant Respondent

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 25. The Amritsar Bench of Tribunal in Sibia Healthcare (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2015) 121 DTR 81 (Asr) (Trib) had held that the adjustment in respect of levy of fees