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

charitable trust institution are undertaken are highly relevant to decide the issue of applicability of proviso to Section 2(15). 28. There is no material/evidence brought on record by the revenue which may suggest that the assessee was conducting its affairs on commercial lines with motive to earn profit or has deviated from its objects as detailed in the trust

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

charitable trust institution are undertaken are highly relevant to decide the issue of applicability of proviso to Section 2(15). 28. There is no material/evidence brought on record by the revenue which may suggest that the assessee was conducting its affairs on commercial lines with motive to earn profit or has deviated from its objects as detailed in the trust

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

charitable trust institution are undertaken are highly relevant to decide the issue of applicability of proviso to Section 2(15). 28. There is no material/evidence brought on record by the revenue which may suggest that the assessee was conducting its affairs on commercial lines with motive to earn profit or has deviated from its objects as detailed in the trust

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

charitable trust institution are undertaken are highly relevant to decide the issue of applicability of proviso to Section 2(15). 28. There is no material/evidence brought on record by the revenue which may suggest that the assessee was conducting its affairs on commercial lines with motive to earn profit or has deviated from its objects as detailed in the trust

RITHWIK FOUNDATION FOR PERFORMING ARTS ,MUMBAI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

221, Maker Chamber\nV, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman\nPoint, Mumbai 400021\n\nThe Commissioner of Income\nTax (Exemptions)\nRoom No. 601, 6th Floor,\nMTNL Building, Peddar\nRoad, Dr. Gopalrao\nDeshmukh Marg, Cumballa\nHill, Mumbai 400051,\nMaharashtra\n\nस्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAJCR5033J\nAppellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी\n\nAppellant by :\nMr. Tarang Mehta,AR\nRespondent by :\nShri Umashankar

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

Section 12AB of the Act was cancelled. 02. The assessee is aggrieved and is in appeal before us on the following two grounds:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application of the Appellant Trust u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) by terming the activities as non- charitable

MASINA HOSPITAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, SALIL MISHRA, MUMBAI

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

charitable institution in 5 ITA No.3377 & 3378/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2026-27 Masina Hospital Trust Mumbai to provide accessible quality health care to the society. The assessee obtained its registration under the new provision of section 12AB from assessment year 2022-23 to assessment year 2026-27 vide order dated 28/05/2021. It also obtained provisional approval u/s.80G from 24/09/2021 to assessment year

MASINA HOSPITAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. SALIL MISHRA- CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

charitable institution in 5 ITA No.3377 & 3378/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2026-27 Masina Hospital Trust Mumbai to provide accessible quality health care to the society. The assessee obtained its registration under the new provision of section 12AB from assessment year 2022-23 to assessment year 2026-27 vide order dated 28/05/2021. It also obtained provisional approval u/s.80G from 24/09/2021 to assessment year

DCIT CC-5(2) CENTRAL RANGE-5, MUMBAI vs. JAYANAND RELIGIOUS TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Jayananad Religious Trust Dcit Cc-5(2) Shop No. 1, 148, Rasik Kunj, Central Range-5, Room No. 1908, Air India Bldg, Jain Society, Sion (W), Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 022 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaatj8901F Assessee By : Sh. Sanjay Kapadia, Ar Revenue By : Sh. Nishant Somaiya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2022

221,734/–, however voluntary contribution received was ₹ nil. Further, in F.Y. 2013–14 to F.Y. 2015 –16 no cash is deposited in the bank account. Therefore, deposit of voluntary contribution of ₹2.90 crores in cash in this period is not explained. Further, online response shows that assessee has received above sum in donation box. A statement under Section

ADV. CHANDANSINH SOLANKI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,VIRAR vs. ITO, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee-trust is allowed

Bench: The First Appellate Authority Came To Be Dismissed Ex Parte Without Affording A Meaningful Opportunity Of Being Heard; & Secondly, That The Lower Authorities Erred In Upholding The Adjustments Made Under Section 143(1), Namely: (A) Denial Of Deduction Under Section 11(1)(A) In Respect Of Actual Revenue Expenditure Of ₹ 89,77,260 Debited To The Income & Expenditure Account; & (B) Disallowance Of The Claim For Statutory Accumulation Of Income Under Section 11(1)(A) To The Extent Of ₹ 11,65,005, Thereby Treating The Gross Receipts Of ₹ 1,01,42,265 As Taxable Income.

charitable trust duly registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 26.12.2024 passed by the Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad, arising out of the intimation issued under section 143(1) for the assessment year 2020-21, whereby the exemption claimed under section 2 Adv.Chandansinh Solanki Education Trust 11 of the Act was denied

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

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

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

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

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

M/S. THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKER IN INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

221 (Ker.); 7. The learned Sr. Counsel for the assessee drawing our attention to the provisions of section 11 of the Act submitted, sub–section (1) of 10 The Board of Control for Cricket in India section 11 of the Act makes it clear that the income to the extent applied for charitable or religious purposes or set apart

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. LAXMINARAYAN MANDIR TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by revenue

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Ms. Padmavathy S(Physical Hearing) Dcit (Exemptions) – 1(1), Mumbai Laxminarayan Mandir Trust 6Th Floor, Mtnl Building, Cumballa Vs Ground Floor, Bapu Bhai Vasi Hill, Pedder Road, Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400026. Mumbai – 400056. [Pan: Aaatl2061J] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

section 221. 3. On the other hand, ld. Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that against the addition in quantum assessment, the Tribunal has deleted entire addition in ITAs No. 3235 & 3273/M/2022 thereby no tax demand was left. The ld. AR of the assessee while explaining the fact would submit that assessee is a public charitable trust

NEIA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (E) II(2), MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or the activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

ACIT (EXEMPTION) - 1(1), MUMBAI vs. GUJRAT RESEARCH SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit-1(1) Gujrat Research Society Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Dr. Madhuri Shah Vs. Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Campus, Ram Krishna Mumbai-400012. Mission Marg, Mumbai-400052. Pan No. Aaatb1718N Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Arju Garodia, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Rupam J. Shukla, Ar Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2017

sections, normal deduction by way of depreciation is claimed and such amount of notional deduction remains to be applied for charitable purpose. Therefore, double benefit is claimed by the trusts and institutions under the existing law. Depreciation has been held to be an application of income in the following judgments: i. CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS

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