HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

charitable institutions who are assessed u/s 11 to 13. In the said case the Hon’ble Orrisa High Court (2023) 151 taxmann.com 433 (Orissa) dated 06/03/2019 held that since the jurisdiction was with the AO (Exemption) on the basis of an affidavit filed by the revenue only, the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act by the ld.AO Corporate

HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

charitable institutions who are assessed u/s 11 to 13. In the said case the Hon’ble Orrisa High Court (2023) 151 taxmann.com 433 (Orissa) dated 06/03/2019 held that since the jurisdiction was with the AO (Exemption) on the basis of an affidavit filed by the revenue only, the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act by the ld.AO Corporate

HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

charitable institutions who are assessed u/s 11 to 13. In the said case the Hon’ble Orrisa High Court (2023) 151 taxmann.com 433 (Orissa) dated 06/03/2019 held that since the jurisdiction was with the AO (Exemption) on the basis of an affidavit filed by the revenue only, the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act by the ld.AO Corporate

HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

charitable institutions who are assessed u/s 11 to 13. In the said case the Hon’ble Orrisa High Court (2023) 151 taxmann.com 433 (Orissa) dated 06/03/2019 held that since the jurisdiction was with the AO (Exemption) on the basis of an affidavit filed by the revenue only, the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act by the ld.AO Corporate

HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

charitable institutions who are assessed u/s 11 to 13. In the said case the Hon’ble Orrisa High Court (2023) 151 taxmann.com 433 (Orissa) dated 06/03/2019 held that since the jurisdiction was with the AO (Exemption) on the basis of an affidavit filed by the revenue only, the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act by the ld.AO Corporate

HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

charitable institutions who are assessed u/s 11 to 13. In the said case the Hon’ble Orrisa High Court (2023) 151 taxmann.com 433 (Orissa) dated 06/03/2019 held that since the jurisdiction was with the AO (Exemption) on the basis of an affidavit filed by the revenue only, the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act by the ld.AO Corporate

HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

charitable institutions who are assessed u/s 11 to 13. In the said case the Hon’ble Orrisa High Court (2023) 151 taxmann.com 433 (Orissa) dated 06/03/2019 held that since the jurisdiction was with the AO (Exemption) on the basis of an affidavit filed by the revenue only, the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act by the ld.AO Corporate

ITO (E) -I(1), MUMBAI vs. DR..D.Y PATIL SPORTS ACADEMY, MUMBAI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

charitable trust, established in December, 2000, with the object of promoting and developing sports, health and fitness awareness and also to impart coaching and training in various sports activities along with conducting sports competition, arranging tournaments, etc. The assessee trust is registered with the charity Commissioner vide order dated 23/02/2001 and also registered with the Department

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. SOCIETY OF THE SERVANT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit(Exemption)-2(1), Society Of The Servant Of The 5Th Floor, Holy Spirit, बनाम/ Piramal Chamber, Holy Spirit Hospital, Vs. Lalbaug, Parel, Mahakali Caves Road, Mumbai-400012 Andheri (E), Mumbai-400092 Pan. No. Aaaas0148J (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, under which the following three questions have been referred to us for our opinion: "1 Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in directing the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation on the assets the cost of which has been fully allowed

NANDALAL TOLANI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (E) - II (2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Nandlal Tolani Vs. Asst. Director Of Income Charitable Trust Tax (Exem.)Ii(2), Mumbai 10-A, Bakhtawar R.P.Goenka Marg Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaatn0043Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Charitable Trust circumstances, misplaced. The said decision is, firstly, sansany reference to any precedents; nay, even without a discussion of the law in the matter. This aspect would in fact become clear in view of the questions referred to and answered by Tribunal. As a reading of its order would show (refer para 1), are not directly connected with

CREDIT GURANTEE FUND TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amit Shuklacredit Guarantee Fund Trust For Micro & Small Enterprises, 7Th Floor, Sme Development Centre, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra(E), Mumbai 400 051 Pan:Aaatc 2613D ...... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Pirmal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai 400 012 .... Respondent

1)(a) of the Act amounting to Rs.53,69,84,940/-, thereby scaling down its total income to Rs.304,29,14,661/-. In the assessment finalized by the Assessing Officer the total income has been assessed at Rs.773,40,60,646/-. The difference between the returned and the assessed income can be understood as follows. Firstly, the Assessing Officer denied

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ADDL DIT (E) RG 1, MUMBAI

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– 1(1) 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent) Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– Range 1 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent)

trust directly or indirectly for the benefit of any person referred to in section 133 Nothing contained in section 11 for section 12 shall operate as per the provisions of the section 13 of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled to the benefits of section 11 of the Act. 11 Media Research Users Council 6.15 The courts have

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (E) 1(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– 1(1) 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent) Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– Range 1 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent)

trust directly or indirectly for the benefit of any person referred to in section 133 Nothing contained in section 11 for section 12 shall operate as per the provisions of the section 13 of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled to the benefits of section 11 of the Act. 11 Media Research Users Council 6.15 The courts have

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

Section 133A of the Act, recorded on oath, during the survey proceedings, ignoring the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (2012) 254 CTR 228? 23. This question was answered by the Hon’ble High Court by observing as under:- “4. We shall now consider the questions as proposed

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

Section 133A of the Act, recorded on oath, during the survey proceedings, ignoring the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (2012) 254 CTR 228? 23. This question was answered by the Hon’ble High Court by observing as under:- “4. We shall now consider the questions as proposed

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

Section 133A of the Act, recorded on oath, during the survey proceedings, ignoring the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (2012) 254 CTR 228? 23. This question was answered by the Hon’ble High Court by observing as under:- “4. We shall now consider the questions as proposed

SNEHASADAN ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2(3), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kuamr Chauhan, Jm

charitable or religious purposes or for the stated objects of the trust to the extent it does not exceed 15 per cent of the income;; 2.2. A sum of Rs.45,00,000/- being the amount deemed to have been applied as per clause 2 of Explanation to section 11(1) of the Act. 2.3. A sum of Rs.11,17,256

NANDLAL TOLANI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E)2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dimissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri G Manjunatha () Nandlal Tolani Charitable Vs Ito (E)-2(1), Mumbai Trust, 10-A, Bhkhtawar, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 Pan : Aaatn0043Q Appellant Respondednt

charitable trust/institution in accordance with the provisions of the Act, even as pointed out by the hon'ble court in Rao Bahadur Calavala Cunnan Chetty 10 ITA 106/Mum/2016 Charities (supra). The Special Bench of the tribunal in Scientific Atlanta India Technology (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2010] 2 ITR 66 (Trib) (Chennai) (SB) held that the profits of a unit eligible