CHAMBER OF INDIAN CHARITABLE TRUSTS,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT/ COMM OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 2168 & 2169/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2022-23) Chamber Of Indian बिधम/ Pcit Charitable Trusts Mumbai-400020. Vs. Gala No.328-332, Linkway Estates, New Link Road, Malad (W), Mumbai- 400064. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaicc9627J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. J. Pardiwala & Mr. Sukhsagar Syal. Revenue By: Shri Nihar Samal (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Imposition Of Certain Impugned Conditions In The Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(E), Mumbai Dated 24.09.2021 & 24.05.2021, Whereby The Ld. Cit(E) Granted Registration U/S 12Ab(1)(A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) & Under Clause (Iii) Of The Second Proviso To Section 80G(5) Of The Act

253 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), or is a University established by law, or is any other educational institution recognised by the Government or by a University established by law, or affiliated to any A.Ys.2022-23 Chamber of Indian Charitable Trust University established by law, or is an institution financed wholly or in part

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

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

4) The applicability of Section 13(2)(b) arises when any property of the trust is made available to specified persons exclusively. If the property is made available to everyone irrespective of whether they are specified persons or not, then provisions of Section 13(2)(b) of the Act do not apply. It has given the premises on rent

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

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

4) The applicability of Section 13(2)(b) arises when any property of the trust is made available to specified persons exclusively. If the property is made available to everyone irrespective of whether they are specified persons or not, then provisions of Section 13(2)(b) of the Act do not apply. It has given the premises on rent

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

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

4) The applicability of Section 13(2)(b) arises when any property of the trust is made available to specified persons exclusively. If the property is made available to everyone irrespective of whether they are specified persons or not, then provisions of Section 13(2)(b) of the Act do not apply. It has given the premises on rent

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

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

4) The applicability of Section 13(2)(b) arises when any property of the trust is made available to specified persons exclusively. If the property is made available to everyone irrespective of whether they are specified persons or not, then provisions of Section 13(2)(b) of the Act do not apply. It has given the premises on rent

ITO (E) 2(3), MUMBAI vs. SRI SRI RADHA DAMODAR CHARITABLE TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhito (E)-2(3) Shri Radha Damodar Charitable 513, 5Th Floor, Trust, Hare Krishna Land, Juhu, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400049 Mumbai-12. Pan:Aafts2570L (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Ram Tiwari (Dr) Assessee By : Sh. Nishant Thakkar With Ms. Jasmin Amalsadwala- Advocates. Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.04.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Revenue Under Section 253 Of Income Tax Act (‘The Act’) Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1

section 253 of Income Tax Act (‘the Act’) is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, Mumbai, [for short the ld. CIT(A)] dated 03.03.2016 for Assessment Year 2009-2010. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

PEGASUS PROPERTIES P. LTD.,PUNE vs. DY CIT, CC-2(3), MUMBAI

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

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

Charitable Trust. Accordingly, ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed. 23. Coming to Ground Nos. 14 and 15 which are in respect of Ad-hoc disallowance of advertisement and sales promotion expenses amounting to ₹.9,71,368/-. Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed his submissions in respect of this issue as under: - “Ground

DCIT (E)- 2(1), MUMBAI vs. J.R.D TATA TRUST , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3082/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) J.R.D Tata Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Bombay House, 24, Homi 2(4), Mody Street, Fort, [Now Assessed By The Mumbai-400 001 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Income-Tax (Exemptions)- 2(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaatt0165F

253 ITR 593/[2001] 119 Taxman 569. Moreover, on a plain reading of Sections 11 and 13 of the Act, it is clear that the legislature did not contemplate the denial the benefit of Section 11 of the Act to the entire income of the Trust. If the interpretation sought to be advanced by the Revenue is accepted, it would

J.R.D. TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) - 2(4) (NOW ASSSESSED BY THE DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3082/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) J.R.D Tata Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Bombay House, 24, Homi 2(4), Mody Street, Fort, [Now Assessed By The Mumbai-400 001 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Income-Tax (Exemptions)- 2(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaatt0165F

253 ITR 593/[2001] 119 Taxman 569. Moreover, on a plain reading of Sections 11 and 13 of the Act, it is clear that the legislature did not contemplate the denial the benefit of Section 11 of the Act to the entire income of the Trust. If the interpretation sought to be advanced by the Revenue is accepted, it would

ITO (E) 2(3), MUMBAI vs. SRI SRI RADHA DAMODAR CHARITABLE TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhito (E)-2(3) Shri Radha Damodar Charitable 513, 5Th Floor, Trust, Hare Krishna Land, Juhu, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400049 Mumbai-12. Pan:Aafts2570L (Appellant) (Respondent) Ddit (E) I (1) Shri Radha Damodar Charitable 504,5Th Floor, Trust, Hare Krishna Land, Juhu, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400049 Mumbai-12. Pan:Aafts2570L (Appellant) (Respondent)

253 of Income-tax Act, is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (CIT-A)-1, dated 18.04.2015 and 30.09.2014 for assessment year 2010- 11 and 2011-12 respectively. The revenue has raised identical grounds of appeal in both the appeal, thus, both the appeal heard together and are decided by common order. ITA No. 7009/M/2014

THE GEM & JEWELLERY EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (E) RG 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for 10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Gem & Jewellery Export Acit (Exemptions) Range- Promotion Council, 2(1), Vs. Tower-A, Aw-1010, G Block, 5Th Floor, Room No. 519, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, B.K.C., Bandra East, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaatt 3202 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Gem & Jewellery Export Dcit (Exemptions) Range- Promotion Council, 2(1), Tower-A, Aw-1010, G Block, Vs. 5Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Lalbaug, B.K.C., Bandra East, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaatt 3202 H Appellant Respondent

Section 2(15). indicated by proviso (ii) to Section 2(15). 174. The insertion of Section 13(8)144 , the seventeenth 74. The insertion of Section 13(8)144 , the seventeenth 74. The insertion of Section 13(8)144 , the seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso

ULTRA TECH CEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Vs. Acit – 2(2), Mumbai Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 2(2), Mumbai Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) Acit – 2(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) Dcit – 2(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Assessee By Shri Arvind Sonde Alongwith Shri Sampat Kabra Revenue By Smt. S.Padmaja

253 (Delhi) 7. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. v. CIT [11 CTR 139] [GUJARAT] 8.Ace Multi Axes System Ltd. V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [2014]367 ITR 266 (Karnataka) 9 ITO vs. Smt. Urmila Bhandari [ITA Nos.766, 2593/Del/2013] 10 Deputy Commissioner of Incme Tax v. Selvel Advertising (P.) Ltd. [2015]37 ITR(T) 611 (Kolkata Trib.) 11. Century Enka

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI vs. SAMRUDDHI CEMENT LIMITED (SINCE AMALGAMATED INTO M/S.ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

253 (Delhi) 7. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. v. CIT [11 CTR 139] [GUJARAT] 8.Ace Multi Axes System Ltd. V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [2014]367 ITR 266 (Karnataka) 9 ITO vs. Smt. Urmila Bhandari [ITA Nos.766, 2593/Del/2013] 10 Deputy Commissioner of Incme Tax v. Selvel Advertising (P.) Ltd. [2015]37 ITR(T) 611 (Kolkata Trib.) 11. Century Enka

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI vs. SAMRUDDHI CEMENT LIMITED (SINCE AMALGAMATED INTO M/S.ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

253 (Delhi) 7. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. v. CIT [11 CTR 139] [GUJARAT] 8.Ace Multi Axes System Ltd. V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [2014]367 ITR 266 (Karnataka) 9 ITO vs. Smt. Urmila Bhandari [ITA Nos.766, 2593/Del/2013] 10 Deputy Commissioner of Incme Tax v. Selvel Advertising (P.) Ltd. [2015]37 ITR(T) 611 (Kolkata Trib.) 11. Century Enka

MUMBAI PORT TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DIT (E), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Mumbai Port Trust, Dit(Exemption), 6Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Port Bhawan, Soorji Vallabhdas Marg, Ballard Estate, Vs. Parel, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400012 Pan: Aaatm5001D (Appellant) (Respondent)

253 of income tax act is directed against the order of Director of Income tax (Exemptions) Mumbai, dated 22 November 2011 for assessment year 2009-10. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: (1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Director of income tax (Exemption) erred in cancelling the restoration

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)

253 of Income Tax Act (the Act) is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)- 1, Mumbai [hereinafter referred as ld. CIT(A)] dated 18.08.2015 for Assessment Years (AY) 2011-12. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “Being aggrieved by the order passed under section 250 of the Income

BALMOHAN VIDYAMANDIR TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) I(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year: 2008-09 Balmohan Vidyamandir Trust, Ito (Exemption)-1 (1), 42, 59-65, Shivaji Park, Dadar, Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai 400028 Pan: Aaatb0099C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Balmohan Vidyamandir Trust, Ito (Exemption)-1 (1), 42, 59-65, Shivaji Park, Dadar, Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai 400028 Pan: Aaatb0099C (Appellant) (Respondent)

253 of Income-tax Act provide specific category of person i.e. “Any assessee” aggrieved by the orders provided under Clause (a) to (f) to file appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, there is no further scope for any other aggrieved person or person(s) interested in the outcome of appeal to approach the Tribunal as intervener. No contrary law is brought

DIVYA SHAKTI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT OR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2166/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Divya Shakti Charitable बिधम/ Pcit Or Cit Trust Mumbai. Vs. A-19, Maharaja Surajmal, 4- Bungalows, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatd3251A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri T. Sankar (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/10/2022 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 (Exemptions), Mumbai Dated 24.09.2021 Whereby The Ld. Cit(E) Granted Approval U/S 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). However, Since The Grant Of Approval Was Made Subject To Several Conditions Imposed In Form No. 10Ac While Granting Registration Under Clause (Iii) Of Section Proviso To Section 80G(5) Of The Act, The Assessee Being Aggrieved Has Preferred This Appeal Challenging The Action Of Ld. Cit(E) Stipulating Conditions While Granting Registration U/S 80G Of The Act. 2. It Is Admitted Fact That The Assessee Is Registered U/S 12A Of The Act & Further It Is Noted That Similar Issue Has Cropped Up (I.E. Cit(E) Had Prescribed Similar Conditions While Granting Approval U/S

4- Bungalows, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAATD3251A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri T. Sankar (Sr. AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 25/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 20/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred

DIVYA SHAKTI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT/COMM OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2167/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Divya Shakti Charitable बिधम/ Pcit Or Cit Trust Mumbai. Vs. A-19, Maharaja Surajmal, 4- Bungalows, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatd3251A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri T. Sankar (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/10/2022 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 (Exemptions), Mumbai Dated 24.09.2021 Whereby The Ld. Cit(E) Granted Approval U/S 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). However, Since The Grant Of Approval Was Made Subject To Several Conditions Imposed In Form No. 10Ac While Granting Registration Under Clause (Iii) Of Section Proviso To Section 80G(5) Of The Act, The Assessee Being Aggrieved Has Preferred This Appeal Challenging The Action Of Ld. Cit(E) Stipulating Conditions While Granting Registration U/S 80G Of The Act. 2. It Is Admitted Fact That The Assessee Is Registered U/S 12A Of The Act & Further It Is Noted That Similar Issue Has Cropped Up (I.E. Cit(E) Had Prescribed Similar Conditions While Granting Approval U/S

4- Bungalows, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAATD3251A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri T. Sankar (Sr. AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 25/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 20/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred