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

Section 2 of the Act reads as under “Provided that the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be a charitable purpose, if it involves the carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business or an activity of rendering any service in relation to a trade commerce or business

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

Section 2 of the Act reads as under “Provided that the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be a charitable purpose, if it involves the carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business or an activity of rendering any service in relation to a trade commerce or business

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

Section 2 of the Act reads as under “Provided that the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be a charitable purpose, if it involves the carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business or an activity of rendering any service in relation to a trade commerce or business

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

Section 2 of the Act reads as under “Provided that the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be a charitable purpose, if it involves the carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business or an activity of rendering any service in relation to a trade commerce or business

THE INDIAN MERCHANTS CHAMBERS,,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -II(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4076/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) The Indian Merchants Chambers, Vs. Ddit(Exemption)-Ii(1), Imc Building, Imc Marg, Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400020 Parel, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaati 00047 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Arvind Sonde राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.S.Jadhav सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/ 06/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)- Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Is Basically Aggrieved For Decline Of Exemption U/S.11 On The Plea That Proviso To Section 2(15) Was Applicable To The Assessee Which Was Introduced W.E.F. Assessment Year 2009-2010. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Registered As A Company U/S.25 Of The Companies Act, 1956. The Main Objects Of The Assessee Trust Inter Alia Are To Promote, Advance & Protect Trade, Commerce & Industry In India. The Ao Held That The Assessee Was Not Imparting Education In Pursuance Of Its Objects. He Held That The Activity Of Organizing Seminars, The Definition Of Education. The Assessee Was Running Certain Seminars

section 2(15) of the Act without appreciating the basic principle laid down by the Court based on the facts of the case. 7. That on the acts and the circumstances of the case of the appellant the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the TDS

UTILITY SUPPLY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

15 of 1992),\nYour goodself attention is now drawn to para below clause (b) of\nsection 2(14) which reads as under:\n\"but does not include-\n(i) any stock-in trade other than the securities referred to in sub-\nclause (b), consumable stores or raw materials held for the\npurposes of his business or profession:\n(ii) personal

BOMBAY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

BOMBAY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & MACKINNON MACKENZIE BUILDING,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXE)-1 (1) , MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 5832/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2009-10) Bombay Chamber Of Commerce & The Income-Tax Officer Mackinnon Mackenzie Building, 4, (Exemptions)-1(1), फनाभ/ Room No. 508, 5 Th Floor, Shoorji Vallabhdas Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. Parel, Mumbai-400 012 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aabcb2270M अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Niraj Sheth, Ar प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi & Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, Drs’ ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 03.09.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2021

section 11 of the Act. 17. The learned Counsel for the assessee explained the brief facts with reference to the income scheme of the assessee which are as under:- Bombay Chamber of Commerce & Mackinnon Mackenzie Building; AY 09-10 a. Certificate of origin fees - Rs. 2,81,06,980/- The appellant has been authorized by the Ministry of Commerce, Government

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU (2), MUMBAI

15, but the Tribunal has\nmechanically relied upon the decision in the case of UCO bank\nwithout even taking note of the fact that the said decision\npertains to the pre-amended period, i.e., assessment year 2013-\n14. Therefore, Tribunal in Bank of India concluded that these\ndecisions of UCO Bank, Union Bank of India, IOB do not hold\ngood

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

15, but the Tribunal has\nmechanically relied upon the decision in the case of UCO bank\nwithout even taking note of the fact that the said decision\npertains to the pre-amended period, i.e., assessment year 2013-\n14. Therefore, Tribunal in Bank of India concluded that these\ndecisions of UCO Bank, Union Bank of India, IOB do not hold\ngood

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

TDS, which is placed in the paper\nbook.\n2.4. The Ld.AO noted that, for all the years under consideration the\nassessee received income by way of;\ni) royalties, ii) agency commission, iii) ground amenities, iv)\ncanteens, v) farmhouse income, vi) lunch income, vii) sale of scrap,\nviii) miscellaneous income, ix) nursing course fees, x) incentives, xi)\nrent income.\nITA No.2509/MUM/2024

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)

2(15) of the Act cannot be invoked in case of the assessee Trust. Accordingly, the claim of the assessee for exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act has been allowed. In view of the said order of the Hon'ble ITAT, it is submitted that the learned assessing officer ought to have given deduction of 15

GIA INDIA,MUMBAI vs. A/DCIT (E) - 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS credit. We in this regard direct the AO to verify the claim of the assessee in serial no.10 & 15 based on documentary evidences and allow the claim in accordance with law. Issues in serial no.11 regarding interest 21 I.T.A. No. 5422 to 5429/Mum/2025 GIA India under section 234B being consequential and serial no.16 being general do not warrant

GIA INDIA,MUMBAI vs. A/DCIT (E) - 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS credit. We in this regard direct the AO to verify the claim of the assessee in serial no.10 & 15 based on documentary evidences and allow the claim in accordance with law. Issues in serial no.11 regarding interest 21 I.T.A. No. 5422 to 5429/Mum/2025 GIA India under section 234B being consequential and serial no.16 being general do not warrant

GIA INDIA,MUMBAI vs. A/DCIT (E) - 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS credit. We in this regard direct the AO to verify the claim of the assessee in serial no.10 & 15 based on documentary evidences and allow the claim in accordance with law. Issues in serial no.11 regarding interest 21 I.T.A. No. 5422 to 5429/Mum/2025 GIA India under section 234B being consequential and serial no.16 being general do not warrant

GIA INDIA,MUMBAI vs. A/DCIT (E) - 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS credit. We in this regard direct the AO to verify the claim of the assessee in serial no.10 & 15 based on documentary evidences and allow the claim in accordance with law. Issues in serial no.11 regarding interest 21 I.T.A. No. 5422 to 5429/Mum/2025 GIA India under section 234B being consequential and serial no.16 being general do not warrant

GIA INDIA,MUMBAI vs. A/DCIT (E) - 1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS credit. We in this regard direct the AO to verify the claim of the assessee in serial no.10 & 15 based on documentary evidences and allow the claim in accordance with law. Issues in serial no.11 regarding interest 21 I.T.A. No. 5422 to 5429/Mum/2025 GIA India under section 234B being consequential and serial no.16 being general do not warrant

GIA INDIA,MUMBAI vs. A/DCIT (E) - 1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS credit. We in this regard direct the AO to verify the claim of the assessee in serial no.10 & 15 based on documentary evidences and allow the claim in accordance with law. Issues in serial no.11 regarding interest 21 I.T.A. No. 5422 to 5429/Mum/2025 GIA India under section 234B being consequential and serial no.16 being general do not warrant

GIA INDIA,MUMBAI vs. A/DCIT (E) - 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS credit. We in this regard direct the AO to verify the claim of the assessee in serial no.10 & 15 based on documentary evidences and allow the claim in accordance with law. Issues in serial no.11 regarding interest 21 I.T.A. No. 5422 to 5429/Mum/2025 GIA India under section 234B being consequential and serial no.16 being general do not warrant