KUTCHI SARVODAYA NAGAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) - 1(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailkutchi Sarvodaya Nagar Vs. Income Tax Officer P.L. Lokhande Marg, (Exemptions)-1(4) Near Narayan Guru High Piramal Chambers, School, Govandi, Lal Baug, Parel, Mumbai – 400043 Mumbai - 400012 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatk0678E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Pradip Kapasi Respondent By : P.D. Chougule Date Of Hearing 22.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 03.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac For A.Y. 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “I. Ground No. 1: Failure To Issue Notice U/S. 250 The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Failing To Issue Notice For Furnishing Written Submissions And/Or Hearing Of Appeal As Required U/S 250(1), (2) & (6B) Read With The Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021 Issued Under Notification No 139/2021 Dt 28.12.2021 Of The Act & In Particular Not Allowing The Appellant To Furnish Its Submissions. Your Appellant Prays That An Order Passed Without Issuing Notice U/S. 250 Be Quashed Ii Ground No. 2: Failure To Give Opportunity Of Hearing By Cit(A) The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing An Order In Appeal Without Giving An Opportunity Of Hearing, Orally Or Virtually, As Required By The Provisions Of The Act. Rules, Scheme, Notifications & Circulars & The Decisions Of The Courts & In Particular The Decision In The Cases Of Ba Continuum India (P.) Ltd., 125 Taxmann.Com 180 (Bom.) & Sanjay Aggarwal, 127 Taxmann.Com

rectification u/s 154 dt 04.03.2021 for amending the assessment order u/s 143(3) dt. 28.12.2016. Your appellant submits that the surcharge was not payable by the assessee charitable trust

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. P K KRISHNAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm Income Tax Officer P K Krishnan Educational Trust 6Th Floor, Mtnl Building Shree Siddhi Vinayak Engl. Vs. Cumballa Hill, Pedder Road, High School, Hariyali Village Mumbai-400 026 Vikhroli (E), Mumbai-400 083 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatp5026F

rectification order u/s 154 4.1 In the order u/s 154 dated 07.03.2023, the reason for rejection of exemption u/s 11 of the Act has been stated to be “Suomoto for form 10b/10bb not filed.” The screenshot of the reason is extracted and placed below for the sake of clarity - P.K. Krishnan Educationl Trust

MAHADEVI PARAMESHWARIDAS JINDAL CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Mahadevi Parameshwaridas Jindal Ito (Exemption)-2(1) Charitable Trust Mumbai 12A, 12Th Floor, Bakhtawar, Vs. 229, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021

rectification u/s. 154 of the Act with respect to disallowance of deduction u/s. 11(2) of the Act was not accepted by the lower authorities. 2 Mahadevi Parameshwaridas Jindal Charitable Trust

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. TATA EDUCATION AND DEVEOPMENT TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

u/s 11(l)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Name of the applicant : Tata Education and Development Trust Address of the applicant : Bombay House, Homi Mody Street, Mumbai-400 001 Date of Application : 31.03.2015 Date of Order : 10.11. 2015 ITA Nos 1423, 1424 and 1535/Mum/2018 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 22 of 51 With reference

TATA EDUCATION AND DEVEOPMENT TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(EXP)-2(1) NOW ASSESSED BY DCIT (EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

u/s 11(l)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Name of the applicant : Tata Education and Development Trust Address of the applicant : Bombay House, Homi Mody Street, Mumbai-400 001 Date of Application : 31.03.2015 Date of Order : 10.11. 2015 ITA Nos 1423, 1424 and 1535/Mum/2018 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 22 of 51 With reference

TATA EDUCATION AND DEVEOPMENT TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(EXP)-2(1) NOW ASSESSED BY DCIT (EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

u/s 11(l)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Name of the applicant : Tata Education and Development Trust Address of the applicant : Bombay House, Homi Mody Street, Mumbai-400 001 Date of Application : 31.03.2015 Date of Order : 10.11. 2015 ITA Nos 1423, 1424 and 1535/Mum/2018 Assessment years: 2011-12 and 2012-13 Page 22 of 51 With reference

DR. D. Y. PATIL VIDYAPEETH SOCIETY,PUNE vs. JT. CIT (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

u/s 154 of the Act, bringing to his attention the short issue of dismissal of the SLP relied upon by the AO, to deny carry forward of deficit in the assessment order in the case of Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation, Poona (402 ITR 441) and relying upon the irrelevant and extraneous reasons given by the AO, to dismiss the appeal

DR. D. Y. PATIL VIDYAPEETH SOCIETY,PUNE vs. JT. CIT (OSD) CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

u/s 154 of the Act, bringing to his attention the short issue of dismissal of the SLP relied upon by the AO, to deny carry forward of deficit in the assessment order in the case of Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation, Poona (402 ITR 441) and relying upon the irrelevant and extraneous reasons given by the AO, to dismiss the appeal

DR. D. Y. PATIL VIDYAPEETH SOCIETY,PUNE vs. JT. CIT (OSD) CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

u/s 154 of the Act, bringing to his attention the short issue of dismissal of the SLP relied upon by the AO, to deny carry forward of deficit in the assessment order in the case of Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation, Poona (402 ITR 441) and relying upon the irrelevant and extraneous reasons given by the AO, to dismiss the appeal

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act and for alleged violation in conditions of Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2)(h) of the Act have not only denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act but have also rejected assessee’s claim of exemption u/s. 10(34) and 10(35) of the Act. We find, while considering identical nature

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 17(3), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act and for alleged violation in conditions of Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2)(h) of the Act have not only denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act but have also rejected assessee’s claim of exemption u/s. 10(34) and 10(35) of the Act. We find, while considering identical nature

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAUTILYA BHAVAN, BKC, MUMBAI vs. TATA EDUCATION TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act and for alleged violation in conditions of Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2)(h) of the Act have not only denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act but have also rejected assessee’s claim of exemption u/s. 10(34) and 10(35) of the Act. We find, while considering identical nature

GOREGAON SPORTS CLUB,MUMBAI vs. DCIT EXEMPTION 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Dcit Exemption 1(1) Goregaon Sports Club R. No. 508, 5Th Floor, Link Road Chinchoi Road Opp Piramal Chambers, Swagat Park, Vs. Malad West, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400 064 Mumbai-400 012 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aatg 0279 P Assessee By : Mrs. Priyanka Jain, Authorised Representative Revenue By : Shri Jasbir Chouhan, Departmental Representative Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2022

charitable trust with The Director Of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai u/s 12 A of The Income Tax Act 1961 and registered with The Charity Commissioner, Mumbai. Goregaon Sports Club; A.Y. 10–11 04. Assessee filed its return of income declaring total income at Rs NIL. The assessment u/s 143 (3) of the act was passed on 19/3/2013 wherein the learned

ROSE ROCK REAL ESTATE INDIA PVT.,MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS) 2(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals are allowed

rectification application U/s 154 of the Act, against the order passed U/s 200A of the Act. This application was rejected by the ITO-TDS, Mumbai on 31st July 2018. 5. Learned CIT(A) in his order has noted the facts as under : That the deductor had filed its TDS Quarterly statement for F.Y.2013-14 as under :- TDS statement Due date

SHREE DADAR JAIN PAUSHADHSHALA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E_ - 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2061/Mum/2019 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Shree Dadar Jain Ito(E)-1(2) Paushadhshala Trust, Room No. 501, 5 Th Floor, Aaradhana Bhavan, Piramal Chambers, V. 289, S K Bole Road, Lalbaug, Parel, Dadar West, Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400028 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaats7848E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri. Bhadresh Doshi Revenue By: Shri. Abhi Rama Karthikeyn S. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 2061/Mum/2019, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 08/02/2019, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖) In Appeal Number Cit(A)-3/It-10394/2017-18, For Assessment Year 2014-15, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 28.12.2006 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay:2014-15. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By Assessee In Memo Of Appeal Filed With The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Tribunal‖) Read As Under:-

charitable works. Thus, the timely filing of Audit Report is put in the statue with a view to keep a check on the potential misuse of these benevolent provisions. In view of the above facts and circumstances, and due to violation of statutory provision u/s 12A of the I.T.Act, I decline to interfere with the findings of the A.O. with

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -17(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyatata Education Trust, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax-17(3) Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Street, Fort, Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatt 9835A

Trust 2. The Id. CIT(A) ought to have held that the impugned rectification order u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') is time barred. 3. The Id. CIT(A) ought to have held that the impugned rectification order is bad in law as it does not contain a Document Identification Number

DAWAT E ISLAMI HIND,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION) , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

rectification order u/s. 154 of the Act. Since the order u/s. 154 of the Act itself is order for correcting mistake apparent from records cannot be considered as erroneous and therefore the Ld. CIT lacks power u/s. 263 of the Act in directing fresh verification of claim u/s. 11(1)(d) of the Act. Therefore, your appellant prays to quash

MANECKJI RUSTOMJI PATEL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX CPC, BANGALURU, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Maneckji Rustomji Patel Trust, Income Tax Cpc, Bangaluru, 5, 2Nd Floor, Oval View, 150 M. Karve Dy. Director Of Income-Tax Ward Vs. Road, Churchgate 25(2)(1), Mumbai-400020. Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra East. Pan No. Aadtm 1078 R Appellant Respondent

rectification. ourt in the case of Sreenivas We find that Hon’ble Madras High C We find that Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Charitable Trust v Dy. CIT Charitable Trust v Dy. CIT [2006] 154 Taxman 377/280 ITR [2006] 154 Taxman 377/280 ITR 357 held that in order to advance held that in order to advance

LATE JAYESH THAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

rectification order u/s 154 of the Act . Further interest u/s 220(2) of the Act was also levied for delayed payment of interest on late payment and interest u/s 234E of the Act. 5. Now the short point that arises for our consideration is that whether late filing fee u/s 234E of the Act could be levied for TDS returns