INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIES TRUST 2008 SERIES 14, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal for A

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Iii Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat17440L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Matru Mandir 2008 Series 36 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16925L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals In Ita No.4789/Mum/2017, 4791/Mum/2017 & 4794/Mum/2017 For A.Y.2010-11 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 32/It-604/23(1)(2)/2015-16, Cit(A)-32/It-48/19(3)(2)/2012-13 & Cit(A)-32/It-483/Ito-19(3)(4)/12-13 Respectively Dated 24/04/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 26/02/2016, 31/10/2012 Respectively By The Ld. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(2) & 19(3)(2) Respectively, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

160(1)(iv) of the Act and section 161 as regards representative assessee did not apply to the assessee in the case on hand. He also upheld the action of the AO in treating the interest received as "Income from business", as against the claim of the assessee that it is not its income but that of the beneficiaries

ITO 19(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIZATION TRUST 2008 SERIES 14I, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Goasinindian Corporate Loan Securitisation Income Tax Officer-9(3)(2) Trust- 2008 Series 14 Mumbai C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Vs. 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent Income Tax Officer-(23)1)(2) Indian Corporate Loan [Erstwhile Ito-19(3)(2)] Securitisation Trust- 2008 Series 14 Room No. 108, Matru Mandir Vs. C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Tardeo Road, Grant Road 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Mumbai 400007 Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent

160(1)(iv) of the Act and section 161 as regards representative assessee did not apply to the assessee in the case on hand. He also upheld the action of the AO in treating the interest received as "Income from business", as against the claim of the assessee that it is not its income but that of the beneficiaries

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

charitable or religious purposes, or which is of the nature referred to in sub- clause (iia) of clause (24) of section 2, or which is of the nature referred to in sub- section (4A) of section 11, tax shall be charged on so much of the relevant income as is not exempt under section 11 or section

RENEWED HOPE COMMUNITY TRUST,NEW PANVEL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm Renewed Hope Community Commissioner Of Income Trust Tax Exemption Pune 322, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax 42, Vighnaharta Enclave, Matheran Road, Office Vs. New Panvel, Pmt Building, Swargate, Navi Mumbai, Thane- Shankar Sheth Road, 410206 Pune-411037 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaetr5822

160 taxmann.com 358/205 ITD 673 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), the ITAT held that where objects of assessee-trust were primarily charitable rather than favouring any specific religious community, CIT(E) was not justified in denying registration under Section

SARASWAT HITWARDHAK MANDAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO 18 (3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman(A.M.) Saraswat Hitwardhak Vs Ito-18(3)(4), Mumbai. Mandal, 1St Floor, Saraswat Bhawan, Chatrapati Shivaji Lane, Mahim, Mumbai – 400 016. Pan : Aagts 2691 M Appellant Respondednt

charitable trusts have to be assessed in the capacity of an individual. He contended that an AOP is an association of persons who have come together for a common purpose of earning income. He contended that in the present case the beneficiaries have not come together with such common purpose. They have not set up the trust. They have

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

Charitable Trust for commission. The assessment of entry\nproviders were completed u/s 153C and commission income on the\naccommodation transaction was taxed. Few donors covered u/s\n133A have admitted and offered the amount of donation received\nback for taxation or have revised the return of income. It was\nconcluded that the assessee Campatrust was indulged in bogus\nactivity

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

Charitable Trust for commission. The assessment of entry\nproviders were completed u/s 153C and commission income on the\naccommodation transaction was taxed. Few donors covered u/s\n133A have admitted and offered the amount of donation received\nback for taxation or have revised the return of income. It was\nconcluded that the assessee Campatrust was indulged in bogus\nactivity

THE CATHEDRAL VIDYA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhthe Cathedral Vidya Trust Ito (Exemption)-1(1), 6, Purushottamdas Thakurdas Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Vs. Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai. Pan: Aabtt5706B (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 11. For fees structure, the assessee contended that the school was established and started from 03.08.2008 and imparting education from Std. IV to Std. XI and Diploma courses. The assessee is imparting world class education with 9 ITA No.4958/M/2015 - The Cathedral Vidya Trust strong Indian Tradition and values with advance school of modern technology. In order

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

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

trust u/s 12AA, this is due to subsequent development, hence the contention of the Ed.CIT(A) and Assessing Officer is not correct. In our considered view, the issue of applicability of section 2(15) of the Act is already considered by the ITAT and issue is well settled in favour of the assessee. The courts have held the activities

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

trust u/s 12AA, this is due to subsequent development, hence the contention of the Ed.CIT(A) and Assessing Officer is not correct. In our considered view, the issue of applicability of section 2(15) of the Act is already considered by the ITAT and issue is well settled in favour of the assessee. The courts have held the activities

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

trust u/s 12AA, this is due to subsequent development, hence the contention of the Ed.CIT(A) and Assessing Officer is not correct. In our considered view, the issue of applicability of section 2(15) of the Act is already considered by the ITAT and issue is well settled in favour of the assessee. The courts have held the activities

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE CATHEDRAL VIDYA TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhri

section 11. For fees structure, the assessee contended that the school was established and started from 03.08.2008 and imparting education from Std. IV to Std. X1 and Diploma courses. The assessee is imparting world class education with strong Indian Tradition and values with advance school of modern technology. In order to get the Teachers and Faculties for imparting good education

SHREE CAMBAY SWETAMBER VISHA SHRIMALI JAIN SAMAJ SAHAYAK TRUST, ,MUMBAI vs. COMMMSSIONER OF INCOMETAX(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 11(1)(a) cannot be invoked only on the ground that the trust deed provides for activities outside India. Some decisions on this Principle are: A. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. State Bank of India reported in (1988) 169 ITR 298, considered the issue whether a trust for charitable purposes in India

HEMLATA CHARITIES,MUMBAI vs. EXEM. WARD 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 11(1)(a) cannot be invoked only on the ground that the trust deed provides for activities outside India. Some decisions on this Principle are: A. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. State Bank of India reported in (1988) 169 ITR 298, considered the issue whether a trust for charitable purposes in India

SILA FOR CHANGE FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar & Sila For Change Foundation Commissioner Of Income-Tax A-301, 3Rd Floor, (Exemption) Neelam Centre, 601, 6Th Floor, Plot 249A, Worli, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai- 400030. Mtnl Building, Pan: Abgcs5333L Vs. Peddar Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Maharashtra- 400026. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11(1)(a) cannot be invoked only on the ground that the trust deed provides for activities outside India. Some decisions on this Principle are: A. Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. State Bank of Indiareported in (1988) 169 ITR 298, considered the issue whether a trust for charitable purposes in India and abroad

SILA FOR CHANGE FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar & Sila For Change Foundation Commissioner Of Income-Tax A-301, 3Rd Floor, (Exemption) Neelam Centre, 601, 6Th Floor, Plot 249A, Worli, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai- 400030. Mtnl Building, Pan: Abgcs5333L Vs. Peddar Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Maharashtra- 400026. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11(1)(a) cannot be invoked only on the ground that the trust deed provides for activities outside India. Some decisions on this Principle are: A. Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. State Bank of Indiareported in (1988) 169 ITR 298, considered the issue whether a trust for charitable purposes in India and abroad

DCIT-CC-8(2), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. JASLOK HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue bearing ITA Nos 2460,2462, 2657,

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

charitable or religious trust is entitled to accumulate twenty-five per cent of its income derived from property held under trust. For the present purposes, the donations, the assessee received, in the sum of Rs. 2,57,376, would constitute its property and it is entitled to accumulate twentyfive per cent there out. It is unclear on what basis

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. JASLOK HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue bearing ITA Nos 2460,2462, 2657,

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

charitable or religious trust is entitled to accumulate twenty-five per cent of its income derived from property held under trust. For the present purposes, the donations, the assessee received, in the sum of Rs. 2,57,376, would constitute its property and it is entitled to accumulate twentyfive per cent there out. It is unclear on what basis