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

260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act) is directed against order dated 14.062012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar, upholding the order withdrawing the status of Charitable Institution given to the appellant-assessee under Section 12AA(1)(b)(i) of the Act. The Tribunal has reached a categorical conclusion that the assessee-Jammu

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

260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act) is directed against order dated 14.062012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar, upholding the order withdrawing the status of Charitable Institution given to the appellant-assessee under Section 12AA(1)(b)(i) of the Act. The Tribunal has reached a categorical conclusion that the assessee-Jammu

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

260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act) is directed against order dated 14.062012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar, upholding the order withdrawing the status of Charitable Institution given to the appellant-assessee under Section 12AA(1)(b)(i) of the Act. The Tribunal has reached a categorical conclusion that the assessee-Jammu

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

260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act) is directed against order dated 14.062012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar, upholding the order withdrawing the status of Charitable Institution given to the appellant-assessee under Section 12AA(1)(b)(i) of the Act. The Tribunal has reached a categorical conclusion that the assessee-Jammu

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

260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act) is directed against order dated 14.062012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar, upholding the order withdrawing the status of Charitable Institution given to the appellant-assessee under Section 12AA(1)(b)(i) of the Act. The Tribunal has reached a categorical conclusion that the assessee-Jammu

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)

charitable purposes of the trust and accordingly we are inclined to uphold the findings of the ld. CIT(A) in allowing both the claim of the assessee. The grounds taken by the Revenue are, therefore, rejected.” 6.The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court 'in the case of Director of Income-tax Vs. Womens India Trust

MUNIWAR ABAD CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) I(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Muniwar Abad Charitable Dy. Director Of Trust Income-Tax Vs. 405A/407, Jolly Bhavan No. 1, (Exemption)-I-(1), 10, New Marine Lines, 6Th Floor, Piramal Mumbai-400020. Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Aaatm0140K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. B.V. Jhaveri, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ram Tiwari, Dr Date Of Hearing : 06/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/04/2018

Charitable Trust 6 in AY 2010-11. It is also submitted that the assessee had not reproduced object clauses in purposes column of Form 10 in a blanket format and the objects for which the funds are accumulated are not general but specific in nature and are in line with the primary object for which it was formed

BALJEEVAN TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEM. WARD 1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1872/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Bal Jeevan Trust बिधम/ Ito (E), Ward-1(1) A/14, Sterling Apartments, Piramal Chamber, Lal Vs. Peddar Road, Mumbai- Baug, Parel, Mumbai- 400026. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatb2973M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri J. D. Mistri Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 15.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Not Allowing The Accumulation Of Rs.30 Lakhs As Per Section 11(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Read With Rule 17 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (Hereinafter “The Rules”).

Section 11(2) of the Act. At the same time the purpose or purposes to be specified cannot be beyond the objects of the trust. Plurality of the purposes for accumulation is not precluded but it depends on the precise purpose for which the accumulation is intended. In the present case, both the appellate authorities below have recorded a concurrent

ALL INDIA PHOTOGRAPHIC TRADE AND INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION ,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E)-1(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Sri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita No. 1387/Mum/2020 (यनधाायण वषा / Assessment Years 2013-14) आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita No. 1705/Mum/2019 (यनधाायण वषा / Assessment Years 2014-15) All India Photographic Trade & The Income Tax Officer(E) Industry Association Ward 1(1), Mumbai 1 S T C-3/6, Taj Building, 210, फनाभ/ Floor, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Vs. Mumbai (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा सं./Pan No. Aaaaa0042K अऩीराथी की ओय से/ Appellant By : Shri Kirit Sanghvi, Ar प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Brajendra Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 22.12.2021 घोषणा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 04.03.2021

section of the public and not for any specified individual. Accordingly, the view taken by the lower authorities that as the assessee trust was set up for providing facilities to a limited group of people and not for the benefit of the general public at large, therefore, it could not be held to be a trust set up for advancement

SAURASHTRA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (E) I(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri M Balaganesh, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 2114/Mum/2015 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5305/Mum/2015 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2011-12) Saurastra Trust The Dy. Commissioner Of Natvarlal Vepari & Co., Income Tax, (E)-1(2) Chartered Accountants. Mumbai, 5 Th Floor, Piramal बनाम/ Oricon House, 4Th Floor, 12, Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. K. Dubash Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 023 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaats2786B अपीलार्थी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Y.P. Trivedi, Vipul Joshi, Ms. Usha Dalal, Ars प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Manjunatha Swamy, Dr ुिवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06.11.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R

Charitable trust Vs DIT (Exem)(Del) 297 ITR 66." It is further held that the provisions of c/f and set off of losses u/s, 72 of the I.T. Act, 1961 specifically refers to "Carry 11 | P a g e ITA No.2114 & 5305/Mum/2015 Saurashtra Trust forward and set off of business losses' in relation to ^computation under the head profit gains

THE BOMBAY CATHOLIC SABHA,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3793/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Bombay Catholic बिधम/ Ito (Exem)-2(4) Sabha Piramal Chamber, Lal Vs. St. Michael’S Church Baug, Parel, Mumbai- Compound, Mahhim (W), 400012. Mumbai-400016. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatt3348L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

Section 11(2) of the Act. At the same time the purpose or purposes to be specified cannot be beyond the objects of the trust. Plurality of the purposes for accumulation is not precluded but it depends on the precise purpose for which the accumulation is intended. In the present case, both the appellate authorities below have recorded a concurrent

CONFEDERATION OF REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)- 3 , MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodconfederation Of Real Estate Acit (Exemption)-1(1), Developers Association Of India, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, 5Th Floor, Phd House, Vs. Parel, Mumbai 400 012 4/2, Siri Insitutional Area, New Delhi-110016

section of the public and not for any specified individual. Accordingly, the view taken by the lower authorities that as the assessee trust was set up for providing facilities to a limited group of people and not for the benefit of the general public at large, therefore, it could not be held to be a trust set up for advancement

CONFEDERATION OF REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS ASSOCIATON OF INDIA ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (EXEM)-1(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodconfederation Of Real Estate Acit (Exemption)-1(1), Developers Association Of India, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, 5Th Floor, Phd House, Vs. Parel, Mumbai 400 012 4/2, Siri Insitutional Area, New Delhi-110016

section of the public and not for any specified individual. Accordingly, the view taken by the lower authorities that as the assessee trust was set up for providing facilities to a limited group of people and not for the benefit of the general public at large, therefore, it could not be held to be a trust set up for advancement

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

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

charitable trusts where the investors name and beneficial interest are not explicitly known on the date of its creation - such information becoming available only when the funds starts accepting contribution from investors, have to be treated as falling within section 164 (1) of the Act and the fund should be taxed in respect of the income received on behalf

ACIT 25 (2), MUMBAI vs. SMT. ANJANA LAXMIDAS VORA, MUMBAI

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – 25 (2) Room Number 220, Second Srimati Anjana Laxmidas Floor, Vora Kautilya Bhavan 1202 – C, Elita, N Dutta Vs. Marg, Behind D N Nagar Bandra Kurla Complex Police Station, Mumbai – 53 Bandra (E) Mumbai – 51 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaipv0293L Co 70/Mumbai/2021 (Assessment Years 2016 – 17) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Srimati Anjana Laxmidas Tax – 25 (2) Vora Room Number 220, Second 1202 – C, Elita, N Dutta Floor, Vs. Marg, Behind D N Nagar Kautilya Bhavan Police Station, Mumbai – 53 Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E) Mumbai – 51 (Appellant) (Respondent)

260 as received by the Assessee in the financial year 2015 – 16 (assessment year 2016 – 17) in the capital city of beneficiary from Nankasai Trustis in the nature of capital receipt. It cannot be said to have been received by the Assessee without consideration and thus outside the purview of Section 56 (2) (vii) in view of direct decision

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

Trust (supra), the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has held that only the non–exempt income by virtue of contravention of section 13(1)(d) of the Act is exigible to tax at the maximum marginal rate. In case of Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions (supra), the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court held that violation of section

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-26(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shrigirish Agrawal

Charitable Trust’ registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (now known as Maharashtra People’s Trust Act, 1950). The assessee trust had obtained registration under section 12A on 10/12/1990. The assessee trust surrendered the aforesaid registration by letter dated 19/02/2015 and filed the return ITR-5 for this impugned assessment year. The assessee declared total income at Rs.9

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. FRAGRANCE AND FLAVOURS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.2973/मुं/2023 (िन.व. 2017-18) Income Tax Officer (E)-1(3), Mumbai Room No.619, Mtnl Telephone Exchange Building, Cumballa Hill, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400 026. ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Fragrance & Flavours Association Of India, 2-B, Court Chambers, 25, Sir Vithaldas Thakersey Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaaaf-0029-K ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Ankush Kapoor, Cit Dr. "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Anil Sathe सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 19/03/2024 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 26/03/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 04/07/2023, For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Revenue In Appeal Has Assailed The Order Of Cit(A) On Following Grounds:

section 11 of the Act to the assessee for similar reasons. The matter travelled to the Tribunal. The Tribunal after examining the facts held that the assessee is entitled to claim benefit of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He placed on record copy of Tribunal order in ITA No.5453/Mum/2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12 decided on 08/12/2017