ITO 23 (1)(2), MUMBAI vs. ISARC-FA-41-I/2011-12 TRUST, MUMBAI

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodito-23(1)(2) Isarc-Fa-41-I/2011-12 Trust. R. No. 108, Matru Mandir, C-11, G Block Sme Grant Road, Development Centre, Bandra Mumbai – 400 007 Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Vs. Mumbai- 400 051 Pan: Aaati8796F Appellant Respondent Ito-23(1)(2) Isarc-Sidbi-2/2009-10 Trust. C-11, G Block Sme R. No. 108, Matru Mandir, Development Centre, Bandra Grant Road, Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 007 Vs. Mumbai- 400 051 Pan: Aaati7943N Appellant Respondent Ito-23(1)(2) Isarc-Bob-1/2009-10 Trust. R. No. 108, Matru Mandir, C-11, G Block Sme Grant Road, Development Centre, Bandra Mumbai – 400 007 Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Vs. Mumbai- 400 051 Pan: Aaati7942P Appellant Respondent : Shri Amit Pratap Singh (Dr) Appellant By Respondent By : Ms. Dinkle Haria (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2020

167B of the IT Act is applicable on the assessee instead of section 164 (1) of the IT Act b) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has ignored the fact that in this case investors/ contributors are also the beneficiaries and at the date of creation of trust, beneficiaries were

SHREE JAIN SWETAMBER DEHARSHAR UPSHRAYA TRUST,THANE vs. ASST CIT PALGHAR CIRCLE, PALGHAR, PALGHAR

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K.Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12 Shree Jain Swetamber Acit, Palghar Circle, Deharshar Upshraya Trust Palghar बनाम/ C/O. Anoopchandji Karnava, T Vs. Main Road, Dahanu Town Dahanu Road, Dist: Thane ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaets4024L

167B(1) or u/s 164(2), and the objects of the setting up of the trust is for public trust, therefore the provisions of section 164(2) of the Act are applicable and the assessee income shall be taxed at normal rates instead of maximum marginal rates, vide appellate orders dated 21-10-2015. 6. Aggrieved by the appellate order

RAHULKUMAR BAJAJ CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

1) of section 2 is subject to the ITA No. 1768 to 1770/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2021-22 to 2023-24) Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3). Sub section (2) of section 2 speaks of an assessee having net agricultural income exceeding five thousand rupees, in addition to total income, hence, is not relevant for our purpose

RAHULKUMAR BAJAJ CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

1) of section 2 is subject to the ITA No. 1768 to 1770/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2021-22 to 2023-24) Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3). Sub section (2) of section 2 speaks of an assessee having net agricultural income exceeding five thousand rupees, in addition to total income, hence, is not relevant for our purpose

RAHULKUMAR BAJAJ CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

1) of section 2 is subject to the ITA No. 1768 to 1770/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2021-22 to 2023-24) Rahulkumar Bajaj Charitable Trust provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3). Sub section (2) of section 2 speaks of an assessee having net agricultural income exceeding five thousand rupees, in addition to total income, hence, is not relevant for our purpose

NIK FAMILY TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 23(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainnik Family Trust Vs. Dcit, Circle – 23(1) C-7, Ishwar Niwas Sick Piramal Chamber. Nagar, Vp Raod, Girgaon. Pan/Gir No. Aadtn2244C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Dharan Gandhi A/W Shri Ashutosh Patare Revenue By Shri Avinash Karpe, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 24.12.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Only Effective Issue Raised In The Present Appeal Regarding Levying Of Surcharge. In This Regard It Is Submitted That Assessee Is A Discretionary Trust, Eligible To File Return In Itr-5, The Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of 2 Nik Family Trust, Mumbai

167B of the Act, tax in case of a Private Discretionary Trust is to be charged at the maximum marginal rate. He submitted, the maximum marginal rate is defined u/s. 2(29C) of the Act, to mean the rate of income tax applicable in relation to highest slab of income as specified in the Finance Act of the relevant year

CHANDRAPRABHU SWETAMBER JAIN MANDIR UPSHRAYA,DHANU vs. ASST CIT PALGHAR CIRCLE, PALGHAR, PALGHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

167B(1) or u/s 164(2), and the objects of the setting up of the trust is for public trust, therefore the provisions of section 164(2) of the Act are applicable and the assessee income shall be taxed at normal rates instead of maximum marginal rates, vide appellate orders dated 21-10-2015. 6. Aggrieved by the appellate order

ISARC-14/2010-11 TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO 23(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result the Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Isarc 14/2010-11 Vs. Ito 23(1)(2), Trust Room No.108, C-11, G Block, Sme Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road Development Centre Grant Road, Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai – 400 007 Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aaati8646N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Ito 23(1)(2), Vs. M/S. Isarc 14/2010-11 Room No.108, Trust Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road C-11, G Block, Sme Grant Road, Development Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aaati8646N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Isarc-12/2010-11 Vs. Ito 23(1)(2), Trust Room No.108, C-11, G Block, Sme Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road Development Centre Grant Road, Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai – 400 007 Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aaati8644Q Isarc Sidbi 2/2009-10 Trust

167B of the IT Act is applicable on the assessee instead of section 164(1) of the IT Act. b)On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has ignored the fact that in this case investors/contributors are also the beneficiaries and at the date of creation of trust, beneficiaries were not identifiable

PARAB MARATHA SAMAJ,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1821/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Parab Maratha Samaj, Nfac, Delhi बिधम/ 10, 5Th Floor Mahohar Bldg, Priti Kanha, Chitable Path, Vs. Dadar(W), Mumbai-400 028 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaatp4197P (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Dinesh Shah, Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Neeta Jeph, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01.09.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 09.05.2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) For Ay 2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

charitable or religious institution or purposes makes investments other than those prescribed u/s 11(5) (eg- Shares of company, loans to trustee's relatives) 9. Here in this case, there is no violation made by the Trust and accordance with section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Act. Thus, only if there is any violation

MOHAMMEDALLY NOORBHOY BANDUKWALLA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ADD/JOINT/DEPUTY/ACIT/ITO, NFAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Mohammedally Noorbhoy Bandukwalla Trust Bhiwandiwala Terrace, J S S Ito, Nfac Delhi Road, Next To Parsi Fire Temple, Estate, Delhi, Metro Cinema, Shop No. 1, Vs. Delhi-110002 Block A, 626 Dhobi Talao Marine Lines(E), Mumbai-400002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatm0718K Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal & Shri Om Kadalgaokar, Ars Revenue By : Shri P. D. Chougule, Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023

1) of The Act. Assessee is a charitable trust not registered under section 12AA of the Act. Therefore, a public charitable trust not registered would be chargeable to tax as Association of persons. The tax incidence of Association of Persons would depend on the Provisions of Section 167B

MAHALAXMI CONSTRUCTION CO,BHAYANDAR WEST vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BANGELURU, BANGELURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

1 SOT 579 (Hyd.)] 2. Lintas Employees Professional Development Trust vs. ITO (ITA No. 4791/Mum/2023); 3. Sriram Trust, Hyderabad vs. ITO (ITA Nos. 439-441/Hyd./2024); 4. Ujjwal Business Trust us. CPC (ITA No. 602/Mum/2024); 5. Lintas Employees Holiday Assistance Trust vs. CPC (ITA No. 1796/Mum/2024); 6. Jitendra Gala Navneet Trust & Dilip Sampat Navneet Trust vs. DDIT

MAHALAXMI CONSTRUCTION CO,MUMBAI vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC , BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

1 SOT 579 (Hyd.)] 2. Lintas Employees Professional Development Trust vs. ITO (ITA No. 4791/Mum/2023); 3. Sriram Trust, Hyderabad vs. ITO (ITA Nos. 439-441/Hyd./2024); 4. Ujjwal Business Trust us. CPC (ITA No. 602/Mum/2024); 5. Lintas Employees Holiday Assistance Trust vs. CPC (ITA No. 1796/Mum/2024); 6. Jitendra Gala Navneet Trust & Dilip Sampat Navneet Trust vs. DDIT