MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

Trust and applicability of section 11(4A) of the Act? The findings of the CIT(A) on the aforesaid questions and the submission of the Appellant with respect to each of the issues are discussed as under — a.) Whether Activities of the Appellant could be considered as 'charitable purpose'? Finding of the CIT(A): The CIT(A) held that

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

Trust and applicability of section 11(4A) of the Act? The findings of the CIT(A) on the aforesaid questions and the submission of the Appellant with respect to each of the issues are discussed as under — a.) Whether Activities of the Appellant could be considered as 'charitable purpose'? Finding of the CIT(A): The CIT(A) held that

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

Trust and applicability of section 11(4A) of the Act? The findings of the CIT(A) on the aforesaid questions and the submission of the Appellant with respect to each of the issues are discussed as under — a.) Whether Activities of the Appellant could be considered as 'charitable purpose'? Finding of the CIT(A): The CIT(A) held that

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

Trust and applicability of section 11(4A) of the Act? The findings of the CIT(A) on the aforesaid questions and the submission of the Appellant with respect to each of the issues are discussed as under — a.) Whether Activities of the Appellant could be considered as 'charitable purpose'? Finding of the CIT(A): The CIT(A) held that

M/S FEDERATION OF FREIGHT FORWARDERS ASSOCIATIONS IN INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, ground no.1 of the assessee is allowed and additions amounting to Rs

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S Federation Of Freight Forwarders Associations, 311/313, Mahinder Chambers, W.T. Patil Marg, Opp. Dukes Factory, Chembur, Mumbai-400071 Pan: Aaatf0039J ...... Appellant Vs. Ito (Exemption)-1(3), Piramal Chambers 4Th Floor, Dr. S.S. Road, Parel, Mumbai-400012. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Nitesh Joshi Respondent By : Sh. Indira Adakil, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/07/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

charitable organizations would now be governed by the additional conditions stipulated in the proviso to section 2 (15)." 5. AO further held as under: “4.3 Further, the assessee in its submission gives reference to provision of investment of interest within the meaning of section 11(5) of the IT Act. However, the assessee failed to pay heed to the CBDT

INDIAN CANCER SOCIETY,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (E)- II (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby ordered to be allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.1857 To 1859/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Indian Cancer Society बिधम/ Asstt. Director Of Income 74 Jerbai Wadia Road, Parel, Tax (Exemption)-Ii(1) Vs. 5Th Floor, Piramal Chamber, Mumbai. Lalbaug, Mumbai. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaati0001K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Sukhsagar Syal (Ar) Revenue By: Shri Mallikarjun Utture (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/08/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/08/2019

section 194 is not available to the trust for application to charitable purposes. Section 198 provides that the amounts deducted

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Charitable Trust 19 ITA.No. 713/Mum/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) ITA NOs. 1791, 1790, 1792 & 1889/MUM/2021& Other appeals Anandilal and Ganesh Podar Society & other group concerns 15:32 To sum up, on the issue of siphoning of funds by the Donee Trusts, there is no adverse observation by the AO in the Remand Report. In the case of DCIT VS Mohan Proteins Ltd, (ITAT

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Charitable Trust 19 ITA.No. 713/Mum/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) ITA NOs. 1791, 1790, 1792 & 1889/MUM/2021& Other appeals Anandilal and Ganesh Podar Society & other group concerns 15:32 To sum up, on the issue of siphoning of funds by the Donee Trusts, there is no adverse observation by the AO in the Remand Report. In the case of DCIT VS Mohan Proteins Ltd, (ITAT

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Charitable Trust 19 ITA.No. 713/Mum/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) ITA NOs. 1791, 1790, 1792 & 1889/MUM/2021& Other appeals Anandilal and Ganesh Podar Society & other group concerns 15:32 To sum up, on the issue of siphoning of funds by the Donee Trusts, there is no adverse observation by the AO in the Remand Report. In the case of DCIT VS Mohan Proteins Ltd, (ITAT

SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

194 of the Act. However, in view of the 2nd proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, we are of the view that if the payees of the interest i.e. the above stated NBFCs have disclosed the said income in their respective returns of income and paid income tax as per the applicable provision of law then there

SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP M/S, S.D. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 24(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

194 of the Act. However, in view of the 2nd proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, we are of the view that if the payees of the interest i.e. the above stated NBFCs have disclosed the said income in their respective returns of income and paid income tax as per the applicable provision of law then there

DCIT 24(3), MUMBAI vs. SHEKHAR S. DADARKAR, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

194 of the Act. However, in view of the 2nd proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, we are of the view that if the payees of the interest i.e. the above stated NBFCs have disclosed the said income in their respective returns of income and paid income tax as per the applicable provision of law then there

SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

194 of the Act. However, in view of the 2nd proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, we are of the view that if the payees of the interest i.e. the above stated NBFCs have disclosed the said income in their respective returns of income and paid income tax as per the applicable provision of law then there

SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 34(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

194 of the Act. However, in view of the 2nd proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, we are of the view that if the payees of the interest i.e. the above stated NBFCs have disclosed the said income in their respective returns of income and paid income tax as per the applicable provision of law then there

BHAV VARDHAN TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Bhav Vardhan Trust, Vs. Ito, (Exemptions)-1(1), Nirmal Niketan, 2, Mumbai. Dr. Bhajekar Street, Mumbai – 400 004 Pan No. Aaatb 3631 Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

194 is not available to the trust for application to charitable purposes. Sec. 198 provides that the amounts deducted by way of income-tax shall be deemed to be "income received". What is deemed to be income can neither be spent nor accumulated for charitable purpose. "Application" or "accumulation" can only be of real income which has actually been received

SAVITA OIL TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC-8(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1258/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Savita Oil Technologies बिधम/ Acit, Central Circle-8(4) Ltd. Room No. 659, Aayakar Vs. 66/67, Nariman Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai- New Marine Line, 400021. Mumbai-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs3513J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Yogesh Thar/Chaitanya Joshi Revenue By: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia (Sr. Ar) Shri Virabhadra Mahanjan (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/07/2023/ (20/10/2023) घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax-50, Mumbai Dated 24.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The First Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee Is As Under: - “1(A) The Appellant Submits That The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [(“Cit(A)”)] Erred In Not Allowing The Claim Towards Expenditure On Account Of Gratuity Representing Amount Actual Paid To An Approved Gratuity Fund Of Rs.83,69,981/- Representing Employer'S Contribution. (B) The Appellant Submits That Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Aforesaid Amount Of Rs.83,69,981/- Was Paid On Or Before The Due Date For Filing Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2017-18 To An Approved Gratuity Fund

trust.” 7. Section 43B of the Act which reads as under: - Certain deductions to be only on actual payment. 43B. Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, a deduction otherwise allowable under this Act in respect of- (a) ……. 7 A.Y. 2017-18 Savita Oil Technologies Ltd (b) any sum payable by the assessee as an employer

SHELTER CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

194 days in the filing of Audit Report in the prescribed Form 108 for the reasons stated hereinabove. From the above narrated facts, it shall be appreciated that the inadvertent omission in the form of the non-filing of Form 108 within the due date, was not a deliberate act on the Trust's part. Thus, depriving the trust

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