SIR RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in both AY 2014-15 and AY

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The assessee was established in 1919. The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2014-15 on 29.09.2014 with the total income at a deficit of Rs. 55,36,69,321/- During the year under consideration, the assessee earned dividend income from shares amounting

ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

12A) of section 80IA of the IT Act, merely neutralises applicability of sub-section (12) and does not disentitle the successor entities to claim deduction in accordance with section 80IA of the IT Act. Accordingly, AO is directed to allow the deduction as claimed by the assessee with respect to eligible units acquired from SCL. Accordingly, Ground no.1

DY CIT CC 1(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

12A) of section 80IA of the IT Act, merely neutralises applicability of sub-section (12) and does not disentitle the successor entities to claim deduction in accordance with section 80IA of the IT Act. Accordingly, AO is directed to allow the deduction as claimed by the assessee with respect to eligible units acquired from SCL. Accordingly, Ground no.1

SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

12A and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. The assessee has also been approved in terms 2 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). of Section 10(23C)(v) of the Act by the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai [in short ‘CCIT, Mumbai’]. 4. For the relevant

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

12A and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. The assessee has also been approved in terms 2 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). of Section 10(23C)(v) of the Act by the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai [in short ‘CCIT, Mumbai’]. 4. For the relevant

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

12A and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. The assessee has also been approved in terms 2 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). of Section 10(23C)(v) of the Act by the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai [in short ‘CCIT, Mumbai’]. 4. For the relevant

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

12A and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. The assessee has also been approved in terms 2 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). of Section 10(23C)(v) of the Act by the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai [in short ‘CCIT, Mumbai’]. 4. For the relevant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 2(15) of the Act. The Appellant submitted that it has claimed exemption u/s. 11 of the Act since the activities of the Appellant are charitable in nature. The Ld. AO after relying on the assessment order for AY 2010-11 denied exemption of section 11 by stating that the Appellant Trust is not a valid trust and also

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 2(15) of the Act. The Appellant submitted that it has claimed exemption u/s. 11 of the Act since the activities of the Appellant are charitable in nature. The Ld. AO after relying on the assessment order for AY 2010-11 denied exemption of section 11 by stating that the Appellant Trust is not a valid trust and also

UNIVERSAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ASST DIT (E) II(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleuniversal Education Foundation V. Assistant Director Of Income-Tax (Exemption) – Ii(2) 1St Floor, Filka Building Mumbai Daftary Road, Malad (W) Mumbai - 400097 Pan: Aabcu0516D (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gain is chargeable for the assessment year 2011-12. 11. Hence, since the payment as mentioned in the assignment deed was not received by M/s. Universal Education Foundation and there was no surety of the receipt of the same in future it was not reflected in Balance Sheet and not taxed during the year. 12. There in uncertainty

DCIT(CC)-8(3) , MUMBAI vs. SANTOSH VIMLESH MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit(Cc)-8(3) Santosh Vimlesh Mehta Room No. 661 6Th Floor, Aaykar 10, Mumbadevi Road, Vs. Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbadevi, Mumbai-400002 Mumbai-400020 Mumbai Pan No. Abhpm 0883 H Appellant Respondent

1) had acquired more than Investrade P. Ltd. (Noticce 1) had acquired more than Investrade P. Ltd. (Noticce 1) had acquired more than 5% of share capital; it was required to make disclosure to the company and the capital; it was required to make disclosure to the company and the capital; it was required to make disclosure to the company

ANANT BAJAJ TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2022-23 Anant Bajaj Trust Deputy Director Of Income Tax, 2Nd Floor, Bajaj Bhavan, Bengaluru Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai – 400021 (Pan: Aagta3192B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Ms. Vasanti Patel, Advocate & Shri M. A. Gohel, Ca Revenue : Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2025 O R D E R

Capital gain other than that covered u/s. 111A and 112A of the Act (Rs.29,16,505/-) at the maximum rate of 37% in the case of the Appellant. 2.2 The ld. AO failed to appreciate that the applicable rate of surcharge, as prescribed under the Part-1 of the First Schedule to the Finance Act for the Total Income excluding

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

capital. Its\nincorporation and set up is under a more generic law when compared\nwith the specific statute of MMRDA Act legislated for establishing the\nassessee which is a strong indicator of intent and modus operandi of\nthe State legislature for the objective it wanted to achieve through the\nassessee.\n\n11. 2. Status of CIDCO as an agent

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

capital. Its\nincorporation and set up is under a more generic law when compared\nwith the specific statute of MMRDA Act legislated for establishing the\nassessee which is a strong indicator of intent and modus operandi of\nthe State legislature for the objective it wanted to achieve through the\nassessee.\n\n11. 2. Status of CIDCO as an agent

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, THANE, ASHAR IT PART, WAGLE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THANE WEST vs. MAHYCO MONSANTO BIOTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, SANDOZBAUGH SO THANE

In the result, the Cross appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

B-Wing, 6th Floor,\nAshar IT Park, Wagle Industrial\nEstate, Thane West - 400604\n(Appellant)\nVs.\nMahyco Monsanto Biotech\n(India) Private Limited\nBayer House Central Avenue,\nHiranandani Estate, Sandozbaugh,\nS.O. Thane - 400607\nPAN: AABCM0176B\n(Respondent)\nPresent for:\nAssessee by\nRevenue by\nShri Nitesh Joshi, CA\nMs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR\nDate of Hearing\n14.11.2024\nDate of Pronouncement

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 (1) , MUMBAI vs. DR D Y PATIL EDUCATIONAL ACADEMY, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

b) of the Act and contended that the said provision has been substituted with effect from 1-9-2019, giving power to the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner of Income-tax to cancel the registration of a trust or institution. Thus, it is clear that should there be any violation with regard to receipt of capitation fee, the Assessing Officer

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 (1) , MUMBAI vs. DR D Y PATIL EDUCATIONAL ACADEMY, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

b) of the Act and contended that the said provision has been substituted with effect from 1-9-2019, giving power to the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner of Income-tax to cancel the registration of a trust or institution. Thus, it is clear that should there be any violation with regard to receipt of capitation fee, the Assessing Officer

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. NANIKRAM MENGHRAJ TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriito V/S. Nanikram Menghraj Trust Room No.618, Mtnl बनाम 113, 114 Navjivan, Building, Cumbala Hill, Commercial Building No.3, Peddar Road, Lamington Road, Maharashtra-400026 Mumbai Central, Maharashtra-400008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatn2215N Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO v/s. Nanikram Menghraj Trust Room No.618, MTNL बनाम 113, 114 Navjivan, Building, Cumbala Hill, Commercial Building No.3, Peddar Road, Lamington Road, Maharashtra-400026 Mumbai Central, Maharashtra-400008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAATN2215N Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी CO. No. 136/MUM/2024 (Arising

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 (1) , MUMBAI vs. RAMRAO ADIK EDUC SOCIETY, MUMBAI

Accordingly. The ground raised by the revenue is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

12A of the Act and\nincorporated with the main object of promoting education. The assessee is part of\nD Y Patil group of charitable institutions. The assessee is running Engineering,\nArchitecture and other courses at Navi Mumbai. There was a search operation\nunder Section 132 on the group entities i.e. D Y Patil University (Navi Mumbai),\nits trustees, certain employees