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

1-4- 2007), provided for set off of MAT credit balance against the amount of tax plus interest i.e., after the computation of interest under section 234B. This was directly contrary to a plain reading of section 115JAA(4). Further, a form A.Ys.2022-23 Chamber of Indian Charitable Trust

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

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

charitable institution under section 12A, is deprived of exemption under section 10(34). To this extent, the registration under section 12A acts as a disability for the assessee, and, by thus ensuring that the registration under section 12A continues to remain in existence, the assessee is denied exemption under section 10(34). Effectively thus, the continuance of registration under section

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

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

charitable institution under section 12A, is deprived of exemption under section 10(34). To this extent, the registration under section 12A acts as a disability for the assessee, and, by thus ensuring that the registration under section 12A continues to remain in existence, the assessee is denied exemption under section 10(34). Effectively thus, the continuance of registration 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

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

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

charitable institution under section 12A, is deprived of exemption under section 10(34). To this extent, the registration under section 12A acts as a disability for the assessee, and, by thus ensuring that the registration under section 12A continues to remain in existence, the assessee is denied exemption under section 10(34). Effectively thus, the continuance of registration 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.

1)(d) of the ITA and has cancelled registration under section 12A of the ITA from a date when there was no such violation. g) The PCIT erred in passing the order cancelling the registration granted to the Trust w.e.f. the date of the Order as per section 12AA(3) and section 12AA(4). The PCIT ought to have clearly

INCOME TAX OFFICER-25(3)(5), MUMBAI vs. NILIMA ABHIJIT TANNU, MUMBAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunatha, Am

section 139(1) and 139(4) of the I.T.Act. Finally the Hon'ble Mumbai bench of the ITAT held that if investment in new asset is made within the date as stated u/s 139(4) of I.T.Act, then the exemption u/s 54 of I.T.Act should be extended to the assessee. Further, the similar 20 I.T.A. No. 5923/Mum/2017

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

1) of the Act. The AO was of the view that, the status of the assessee as a trust existing solely for charitable purposes was evident from the certificate obtained u/s 80G of the Act. It was the AO’s case that, the registration under Section 80G of the Act was given to only those trusts, which were established

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

1) of the Act. The AO was of the view that, the status of the assessee as a trust existing solely for charitable purposes was evident from the certificate obtained u/s 80G of the Act. It was the AO’s case that, the registration under Section 80G of the Act was given to only those trusts, which were established

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

1) of the Act. The AO was of the view that, the status of the assessee as a trust existing solely for charitable purposes was evident from the certificate obtained u/s 80G of the Act. It was the AO’s case that, the registration under Section 80G of the Act was given to only those trusts, which were established

SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

1) of the Act. The AO was of the view that, the status of the assessee as a trust existing solely for charitable purposes was evident from the certificate obtained u/s 80G of the Act. It was the AO’s case that, the registration under Section 80G of the Act was given to only those trusts, which were established

JINSEVA FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appe

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

4) Where registration or provisional registration of a trust or an institution has been stration of a trust or an institution has been granted under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of sub granted under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) of sub section (1) or clause

SIR RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NFAC, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in both AY 2014-15 and AY

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

4 10,623 1989-90 Shares Gifted to SarvajikSeva Trust (44) 10,579 1992-93 Bonus Shares received 1:1 10,579 21,158 1994-95 Bonus Shares received 1:1 21,158 42,316 1997-98 Bonus Shares received 1:2 21,158 63,474 1999-2000 Bonus Shares received 1

SIR RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in both AY 2014-15 and AY

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

4 10,623 1989-90 Shares Gifted to SarvajikSeva Trust (44) 10,579 1992-93 Bonus Shares received 1:1 10,579 21,158 1994-95 Bonus Shares received 1:1 21,158 42,316 1997-98 Bonus Shares received 1:2 21,158 63,474 1999-2000 Bonus Shares received 1

M/S MANTHAN INC,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX CIRCLE, 19(2) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Manthan Inc, Acit Cir. 19(2), Rani Bldg., V.P. Road, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai. Pan No. Aakfm 6011 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Dilip Diwan, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2023

1) of the Act to various parties. to various parties. The information interalia alia contains that M/s Navjeevan Charitable M/s Navjeevan Charitable Trust was used to received cheque payments of purported donation, Trust was used to received cheque payments of purported donation Trust was used to received cheque payments of purported donation which were then routed to certain bogus purchase

M/S MANTHAN INC ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX CIRCLE, 19(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Manthan Inc, Acit Cir. 19(2), Rani Bldg., V.P. Road, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai. Pan No. Aakfm 6011 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Dilip Diwan, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2023

1) of the Act to various parties. to various parties. The information interalia alia contains that M/s Navjeevan Charitable M/s Navjeevan Charitable Trust was used to received cheque payments of purported donation, Trust was used to received cheque payments of purported donation Trust was used to received cheque payments of purported donation which were then routed to certain bogus purchase

DATTATRAY N SAWANT HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No 2360/Mum/2013 is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

4,50,000/- , the Joint Charity Commissioner sanctioned the Bai Zaverbai Purshottam Nathu Charitable Trust with the permission to alienate the trust property to sell it to Janakalyan Seva Sanstha Charitable Trust. The assessee has sold the plot with school building constructed by it only in this plot no 68 to Vatsalabai Dattaray Chatitable Trust. The ld. CIT(A) observed