DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ALL INDIA GEM AND JEWELLERY DOMESTIC COUNCIL, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

trust are related parties in terms of section 13(3) of the Act and the assessee is hit by in terms of section 13(3) of the Act and the assessee is hit by in terms of section 13(3) of the Act and the assessee is hit by provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act which

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

In the result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed

charitable trust registered u/s.12A of the Act and for alleged violation\nin conditions of Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2)(h

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

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

In the result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed

charitable trust registered u/s.12A of the Act and for alleged violation\nin conditions of Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2)(h

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

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

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

h) – AY 2014-15 & AY 2018-19 (iii) The assessee has violated the provisions of section 13(1)(c) – AY 2018-19 (iv) The assessee has violated the provisions of section 2(15) – AY 2018-19 ITA No. 4154/Mum/2023 – AY 2014-15 3. The assessee is a Public Charitable Trust

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

h) – AY 2014-15 & AY 2018-19 (iii) The assessee has violated the provisions of section 13(1)(c) – AY 2018-19 (iv) The assessee has violated the provisions of section 2(15) – AY 2018-19 ITA No. 4154/Mum/2023 – AY 2014-15 3. The assessee is a Public Charitable Trust

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -26(1),MUMBAI, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX,MUMBAI vs. R D TATA TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

charitable objects of the Trust. Section 13(1)(c) of the Act provides that benefit of Section 11 shall not be available in respect of income of the trust applied for the direct or indirect benefit of person specified in Section 13(3) of the Act. Section 13(2)(h

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

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

2) where whole or any part of relevant income of the trust is not exempt under s. 11 or s. 12 because of contravention of s. 13(1)(d), tax is chargeable on such income or part thereof at the maximum marginal rate—Only the non-exempt portion of income would fall

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

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

2) where whole or any part of relevant income of the trust is not exempt under s. 11 or s. 12 because of contravention of s. 13(1)(d), tax is chargeable on such income or part thereof at the maximum marginal rate—Only the non-exempt portion of income would fall

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

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

2) where whole or any part of relevant income of the trust is not exempt under s. 11 or s. 12 because of contravention of s. 13(1)(d), tax is chargeable on such income or part thereof at the maximum marginal rate—Only the non-exempt portion of income would fall

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

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

2) where whole or any part of relevant income of the trust is not exempt under s. 11 or s. 12 because of contravention of s. 13(1)(d), tax is chargeable on such income or part thereof at the maximum marginal rate—Only the non-exempt portion of income would fall

R.D.TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E)-2(2) (NOW ASSESSED BY THE ASSTT.CIT 17(3)), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.3 to 5 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

charitable objects of the Trust. Section 13(1)(c) of the Act provides that benefit of Section 11 shall not be available in respect of income of the trust applied for the direct or indirect benefit of person specified in Section 13(3) of the Act. Section 13(2)(h

NAVJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) RANGE-II(NOW ASSESSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(2)), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 13(2)(h) of the Act. 5.1 The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue as emanating from record are: The assessee is registered as a Charitable Organization with M/s. Navajbhai Ratan Tata Trust

NAVJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) RANGE-II(NOW ASSESSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(2)), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 13(2)(h) of the Act. 5.1 The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue as emanating from record are: The assessee is registered as a Charitable Organization with M/s. Navajbhai Ratan Tata Trust

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(2)), MUMBAI vs. NAVJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 13(2)(h) of the Act. 5.1 The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue as emanating from record are: The assessee is registered as a Charitable Organization with M/s. Navajbhai Ratan Tata Trust

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(2)), MUMBAI vs. NAVJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 13(2)(h) of the Act. 5.1 The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue as emanating from record are: The assessee is registered as a Charitable Organization with M/s. Navajbhai Ratan Tata Trust

NAVJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(2)), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 13(2)(h) of the Act. 5.1 The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue as emanating from record are: The assessee is registered as a Charitable Organization with M/s. Navajbhai Ratan Tata Trust