HDFC BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2 (3) (1), MUMBAI

7\nITA No. 1555, 1573, 2258, 2259 & 2260 Mum 2025\nΑ.Υ. 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22\nHDFC Bank Limited, Mumbai\nRs 70,18,504) was disallowed and added to the total income of the\nassessee. The AO applied Rule 8D(2)(ii).In doing so, the AO aggregated\nthe opening and closing balances of all the strategic investments

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

trust for charitable purposes, which is of the nature referred to in section 11(4A), tax shall be charged on so much of the relevant income as is not exempt under section 11. Section 164(2) was reintroduced by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989 with effect from 1-4-1989. Earlier it was omitted by the Direct

SIR RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NFAC, 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

trust for charitable purposes, which is of the nature referred to in section 11(4A), tax shall be charged on so much of the relevant income as is not exempt under section 11. Section 164(2) was reintroduced by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989 with effect from 1-4-1989. Earlier it was omitted by the Direct

NAVAJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Page 2 Of 47 1 A) The Impugned Order Dated 31.10.2019 Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax-17 ('Pcit') Under Section 12Aa(3)/(4) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('Ita') Cancelling The Registration Of The Appellant Is Without Jurisdiction And, Hence, Void Ab Initio.

11, 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai 400 012 Dear Sir, Page 7 of 47 Navajibai Ratan Tata Trust is a public charitable trust created by the trust deed dated 23rd December 1974. The trust, on 1st August 1975, had filed the prescribed form no. 10A for registering itself as required under section

TATA EDUCATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

11 with effect from 1st April 2015, tax exemption for ‘dividends from Indian companies’, on which dividend distribution tax is already paid by the company distributing dividends anyway, under section 10(34)- as is available to every other taxpayer, is no longer admissible to charitable trusts registered under section 12A. This sub section provides as follows: (7

JAMSETJI TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

7) to Section 11 with effect from 1st April 2015, tax exemption for ‘dividends from Indian companies’, on which dividend distribution tax is already paid by the company distributing dividends anyway, under section 10(34)- as is available to every Assessment Year: 2019-20 Page 25 of 36 other taxpayer, is no longer admissible to charitable trusts

TATA SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

11 with effect from 1st April 2015, tax exemption for ‘dividends from Indian companies’, on which dividend distribution tax is already paid by the company distributing dividends anyway, under section 10(34)- as is available to every other taxpayer, is no longer admissible to charitable trusts registered under section 12A. This sub section provides as follows: (7

SARVAJANIK SEVA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

11 with effect from 1st April 2015, tax exemption for ‘dividends from Indian companies’, on which dividend distribution tax is already paid by the company distributing dividends anyway, under section 10(34)- as is available to every other taxpayer, is no longer admissible to charitable trusts registered under section 12A. This sub section provides as follows: (7

R D TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

11 with effect from 1st April 2015, tax exemption for ‘dividends from Indian companies’, on which dividend distribution tax is already paid by the company distributing dividends anyway, under section 10(34)- as is available to every other taxpayer, is no longer admissible to charitable trusts registered under section 12A. This sub section provides as follows: (7

ITO(E)-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BHAVITHA FOUNDATION, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2021-22

7 provisions of section 11(5) of the Act r.w.s. 13(1)(d) of the Act. provisions of section 11(5) of the Act r.w.s. 13(1)(d) of the Act. provisions of section 11(5) of the Act r.w.s. 13(1)(d) of the Act. Accordingly, assessee disinvested the equity shares in Majesco Ltd. Accordingly, assessee disinvested the equity

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Charitable Trust-Procedure for registration – Assessee was a trust registered under Section 12 AA and was providing employment to poor women, assisting weaker section of the society for personal development, maintaining destitute homes, rehabilitation of victim of national calamities, etc- Assessee had invested a sum of Rs.20,000 in the share of MIOT Hospital Ltd- AO had passed an order

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Charitable Trust-Procedure for registration – Assessee was a trust registered under Section 12 AA and was providing employment to poor women, assisting weaker section of the society for personal development, maintaining destitute homes, rehabilitation of victim of national calamities, etc- Assessee had invested a sum of Rs.20,000 in the share of MIOT Hospital Ltd- AO had passed an order

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Charitable Trust-Procedure for registration – Assessee was a trust registered under Section 12 AA and was providing employment to poor women, assisting weaker section of the society for personal development, maintaining destitute homes, rehabilitation of victim of national calamities, etc- Assessee had invested a sum of Rs.20,000 in the share of MIOT Hospital Ltd- AO had passed an order

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Charitable Trust-Procedure for registration – Assessee was a trust registered under Section 12 AA and was providing employment to poor women, assisting weaker section of the society for personal development, maintaining destitute homes, rehabilitation of victim of national calamities, etc- Assessee had invested a sum of Rs.20,000 in the share of MIOT Hospital Ltd- AO had passed an order

SETH WALCHAND HIRACHAND MEMORIAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) II(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be Allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

section 11(1)(a), the expenditure incurred by a trust or institute on the 4 A.Y.2010-11 objects of the trust by way of application of income derived from the property held for religious or charitable purposes is deductible from the income. It was submitted that there is no bar in law and there are no specific provisions

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

7. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in adjudicating that the assessee trust shall be covered under the exceptions provided in section 115BBC(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act and therefore the provisions of sections 115BBC(1) shall not apply to the assessee? 8. Whether, the impugned

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

7. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in adjudicating that the assessee trust shall be covered under the exceptions provided in section 115BBC(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act and therefore the provisions of sections 115BBC(1) shall not apply to the assessee? 8. Whether, the impugned

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

7. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in adjudicating that the assessee trust shall be covered under the exceptions provided in section 115BBC(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act and therefore the provisions of sections 115BBC(1) shall not apply to the assessee? 8. Whether, the impugned