ASST CIT CIR 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

trusts and conveniences calculated to benefit employees or ex-employees of the company or the dependents or connections of such persons; granting pensions and allowances and making payments towards insurance; subscribing to or guaranteeing moneys for charitable or benevolent objects or for any exhibition or for any public, general or useful object; (k) the acquisition, construction, maintenance and alteration

JAMSETJI TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

36 (i) The Trust was constituted by trust deed dated 23.12.1974 and obtained registration as public charitable trust in August 1975 under section 12A(a) of the ITA. In August 1975 it had filed prescribed Form 10A as required under section 12A(a) of the ITA. Vide communication dated 15.03.1976 the Trust was informed that the said application had been

TATA SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

charitable trust in August 1975 under section 12A(a) of the ITA. In August 1975 it had filed prescribed Form 10A as required under section 12A(a) of the ITA. Vide communication dated 15.03.1976 the Trust was informed that the said application had been entered at Sr No TR/10925 in the Register of Applications under section

SARVAJANIK SEVA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

charitable trust in August 1975 under section 12A(a) of the ITA. In August 1975 it had filed prescribed Form 10A as required under section 12A(a) of the ITA. Vide communication dated 15.03.1976 the Trust was informed that the said application had been entered at Sr No TR/10925 in the Register of Applications under section

R D TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

charitable trust in August 1975 under section 12A(a) of the ITA. In August 1975 it had filed prescribed Form 10A as required under section 12A(a) of the ITA. Vide communication dated 15.03.1976 the Trust was informed that the said application had been entered at Sr No TR/10925 in the Register of Applications under section

NAVAJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Page 2 Of 47 1 A) The Impugned Order Dated 31.10.2019 Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax-17 ('Pcit') Under Section 12Aa(3)/(4) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('Ita') Cancelling The Registration Of The Appellant Is Without Jurisdiction And, Hence, Void Ab Initio.

vii) The above shows that surrender/ cancellation has been accepted and the same has been consistently reflected in the department's own actions. 14. None of these submissions, however, impressed the respondent Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. He proceeded with cancelling the registration of the assessee trust, as granted under section 12A, and he cancelled the registration with effect from

TATA EDUCATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

vii) The above shows that surrender/ cancellation has been accepted and the same has been consistently reflected in the department's own actions. 14. None of these submissions, however, impressed the respondent Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. He proceeded with cancelling the registration of the assessee trust, as granted under section 12A, and he cancelled the registration with effect from

JEEVANDEEP EDUMEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE CIT-6, MUMBAI

In the result, the a In the result, the appeal of the assessee is stands allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2020-21 Jeevandeep Edumedia Pvt. Ltd., Pr. Cit-6, 1St Floor, Sun Paradise Business 501,5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Plaza, Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Maharishi Karve Road, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aabcj 0180 G Appellant Respondent

Charitable AAATL0063C 2,00,000 2,00,000 Trust Total Donation 24,98,000 24,98,000 Qualifying Amount 24,98,000 24,98,000 Deductible amount under section 80 G @ 50% Deductible amount under section 80 G @ 50% 12,49,000 12,49,000 Jeevandeep Edumedia Pvt. Ltd. Jeevandeep Edumedia Pvt. Ltd. proceedings. Contemporaneously, the above donations of Rs.24

ITO(E)-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BHAVITHA FOUNDATION, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2021-22

36;" It is pertinent that receipt of shares as corpus donation is in It is pertinent that receipt of shares as corpus donation is in It is pertinent that receipt of shares as corpus donation is in accordance with the section 11 of the Act read with section accordance with the section 11 of the Act read with section accordance

ACIT, CIRCLE - 3 3 1, MUMBAI vs. JAMNAGAR UTILITIES AND POWER PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed\npartly

VII of Company's Act, is donation\nor voluntary contribution within the meaning of Section 80G r.w.s. 's\n11 & 12 of the IT Act, 1961?\"\n2. \"Whether the MTM losses arising out of Currency Swap Contract\ndo not fall in the purview of Section 43AA of the Act which is subject\nto the section 43A of the Act relating

ACIT, CIRCLE - 3 3 1, MUMBAI vs. JAMNAGAR UTILITIES AND POWER PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed\npartly

VII of Company's Act, is donation\nor voluntary contribution within the meaning of Section 80G r.w.s. 's\n11 & 12 of the IT Act, 1961?\"\n2. \"Whether the MTM losses arising out of Currency Swap Contract\ndo not fall in the purview of Section 43AA of the Act which is subject\nto the Section 43A of the Act relating

RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (E), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

vii) of para 8.2 above, it is clear from the discussion made in Para 8.3 of this order that the Assessing Officer did not seek complete details which were required for due verification of this aspect. From the details it does not come out that the shares were held as corpus on 01.06.1973, which is an exempt category. For this

J.R.D TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (E), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

vii) of para 8.2 above, it is clear from the discussion made in Para 8.3 of this order that the Assessing Officer did not seek complete details which were required for due verification of this aspect. From the details it does not come out that the shares were held as corpus on 01.06.1973, which is an exempt category. For this

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

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

36,50,493/- on 30th September, 2008. The assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 29th December, 2020 at ₹nil. 04. Subsequently, notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act on 15th Mach, 2015 for violation of the provision of Section 13 of the Act and therefore, the action under Section

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

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

36,50,493/- on 30th September, 2008. The assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 29th December, 2020 at ₹nil. 04. Subsequently, notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act on 15th Mach, 2015 for violation of the provision of Section 13 of the Act and therefore, the action under Section

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

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

36,50,493/- on 30th September, 2008. The assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 29th December, 2020 at ₹nil. 04. Subsequently, notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act on 15th Mach, 2015 for violation of the provision of Section 13 of the Act and therefore, the action under Section

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

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

36,50,493/- on 30th September, 2008. The assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 29th December, 2020 at ₹nil. 04. Subsequently, notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act on 15th Mach, 2015 for violation of the provision of Section 13 of the Act and therefore, the action under Section

A.K. CAPITAL SERVICES LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PCIT, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

VII of the Act and Companies (CSR) Policy Rules, 2014 where companies having net worth of Rs 500 crores of more or turnover of Rs. 1000 crores or more or net profit of Rs 5 crores of more have to mandatorily comply with the CSR provisions specified us. 135(1) of the Companies Act, 2011. The above mentioned companies