DR. PRABHA ATRE FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2020-21

12A(1)(ba) of the Act provides that the provisions of section 11 and 12 shall apply in relation to income of any trust or institution if the person in receipt of the income has furnished the return of income for the previous year in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (4A) of section 139 i.e. within the time

ACIT 17(1), MUMBAI vs. ELVE CORPORATION, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

charitable purposes. Section 12 deals with income of trust or institutions from contributions. By section 12A conditions for applicability of sections 11 and 12 are set out. Section 12AA sets out the procedure for registration. Section 13 states that section 11 will not apply in certain cases. By section 13A, special provision is made relating to incomes of political parties

ACIT 17(1), MUMBAI vs. ELVE CORPORATION, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

charitable purposes. Section 12 deals with income of trust or institutions from contributions. By section 12A conditions for applicability of sections 11 and 12 are set out. Section 12AA sets out the procedure for registration. Section 13 states that section 11 will not apply in certain cases. By section 13A, special provision is made relating to incomes of political parties

SHA HURGOWAN ANANDJI DESAI CHARITIES ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC , BENGULURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2022-23 Sha Hurgowan Anandji Desai Dy. Director Of Income-Tax, Cpc Charities, Bengaluru, 18, Bhaskar Lane, Bhuleshwar, Vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400002. Ward 2(3), 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaats 0405 R Appellant Respondent

Ba Processing Centre, Bangalore (herein after referred to as the AO) ngalore (herein after referred to as the AO) on the grounds that the Appellant did not furnish Audit Report in on the grounds that the Appellant did not furnish Audit Report in on the grounds that the Appellant did not furnish Audit Report in Form 10 Form

NEW BOMBAY MERCHANTS EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CPC BANGALORE, CPC BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shriamarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

charitable purpose. During the impugned assessment year, the assessee claimed exemption under sections 11 and 12 of the Act and section 12A is constituted validly. But during the impugned assessment year, the assessee filed the return under section 139(4A) but delay in Form 10B which is obtained on 30/09/2016 under sub sections (2)of the section

SHREE SPANAN FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-CPC BANGALURU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes in above terms

charitable\npurposes was disallowed and demand was raised against the\nassessee. There is a delay of 3 days in filing the ITR and assessee\nhas requested to condone the delay. The assesee has claimed in its\nwritten submission that it had obtained audit report in form\nNo.10B and compulsory e-filing of such reports commenced only\nw.e.f A.Y.2017-18. According

VIPASSANA RESEARCH INSTITUTE,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) - 2(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri. Vikas Awasthy & Shri G. Manjunathavipassana Research Institute Vs. Ito(Exemptions)-2(4) 2Nd Floor, Green House Piramal Chambers Green Street, Fort Lalbaug, Parel Mumbai-400 023 Mumbai-400 012 Pan/Gir No.Aaatv1217E (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

12A of the I.T.Act 1961. The assessee has filed its return of income for AY 2012-13 on 30/09/2012, declaring total deficit at Rs. 97,47,021/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO noticed that the assesse has claimed depreciation on assets, which have been claimed as application of income

SAYAJI-U BA KHIN MEMORIAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ASST DIT (E) 1(2), MUMBAI

Appeal of the Assessee is hereby allowed and appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1708/M/14 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Sayaji-U-Ba Khin Memorial The Asstt. Director Of बनाम/ Trust Income Tax (Exempt) 1(2) Vs. 2Nd Floor, Green House, Room No.504, Green Street, Fort, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400023 Parel, Mumbai - 400012 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2797/M/14 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) The Asstt. Director Of Sayaji-U-Ba Khin Memorial बनाम/ Income Tax (Exempt) 1(2) Trust Vs. Room No.504, 2Nd Floor, Green House, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Green Street, Fort, Parel, Mumbai-400023 Mumbai - 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatt0114E

Ba Khin Memorial बनाम/ Income Tax (Exempt) 1(2) Trust Vs. Room No.504, 2nd Floor, Green House, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Green Street, Fort, Parel, Mumbai-400023 Mumbai - 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAATT0114E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Niraj Sheth & Rajnikant Chaniyari Department by: Shri Chandrajit Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing

DDIT (E) I (2), MUMBAI vs. SAYAJI U-BA KHIN MEMORIAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Appeal of the Assessee is hereby allowed and appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1708/M/14 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Sayaji-U-Ba Khin Memorial The Asstt. Director Of बनाम/ Trust Income Tax (Exempt) 1(2) Vs. 2Nd Floor, Green House, Room No.504, Green Street, Fort, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400023 Parel, Mumbai - 400012 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2797/M/14 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) The Asstt. Director Of Sayaji-U-Ba Khin Memorial बनाम/ Income Tax (Exempt) 1(2) Trust Vs. Room No.504, 2Nd Floor, Green House, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Green Street, Fort, Parel, Mumbai-400023 Mumbai - 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatt0114E

Ba Khin Memorial बनाम/ Income Tax (Exempt) 1(2) Trust Vs. Room No.504, 2nd Floor, Green House, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Green Street, Fort, Parel, Mumbai-400023 Mumbai - 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAATT0114E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Niraj Sheth & Rajnikant Chaniyari Department by: Shri Chandrajit Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing

ITO (EXEMPTION)-2(3) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SAYAJI-U-BA KHIN MEMORIAL TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Ba Khin Memorial Trust 2nd Floor, Green House, Green Street, Fort, Mumbai 400 023 PAN : AAATT0114E Appellant by Shri Rajat Mittal Revenue by Shri Rajnikant Chemiyari Date of hearing 13-03-2018 Date of pronouncement 21-03-2018 O R D E R Per G Manjunatha, AM : This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order

ITO (EXEMPTION)-2(3) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SAYAJI-U-BA KHIN MEMORIAL TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh: A.Y : 2011-12

1. Whether on the facts of the case and in law the ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee on account of disallowing depreciation on fixed assets of Rs.80,55,519/- in contravention of the decision of Escorts Ltd. Vs. UOI 199 ITR 43 wherein it was held that since section 11 of the Income

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

BA Continuum India (P.) Ltd., 125 taxmann.com 180 (Bom.) and Sanjay Aggarwal, 127 taxmann.com P a g e | 2 Kutchi Sarvodaya Nagar Vs. ITO (Exemption) -1(4) 637 (Delhi) Your appellant prays that such an order passed in violation of the provisions of the Act and the Natural Justice be quashed. III. GROUND NO. 3: FAILURE TO GIVE OPPORTUNITY