UMMEED FOUNDATION,AL SHAKREEN APT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PMT BUILDING COMMERCIAL COMPLEX

In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Ummeed Foundation, Cit(E), Pune, Room No. 204, A1 Shakreen Apt, 322, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax Vs. Waf Acomplex Chs, H-104, Office, Pmt Building Sharifa Road, Amrut Nagar, City Commercial Complex, Shankar Convent High School, Thane, Sheth Road, Swargate, Kausa B.O., Maharashtra-400612. Pune-411037. Pan No. Aaatu 4914 H Appellant Respondent

trust or institution has been provisionally approved under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act, the been provisionally approved under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act, the been provisionally approved under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act, the application for regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) application for regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) is required

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

III of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, the Ld. DR pointed out that, in terms of Section 9, any trust whose purpose was exclusively for religious teaching or worship, would not qualify as a public trust for charitable purposes. According to Ld. DR, the fact that the assessee Trust was earlier registered under this Act substantiated

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

III of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, the Ld. DR pointed out that, in terms of Section 9, any trust whose purpose was exclusively for religious teaching or worship, would not qualify as a public trust for charitable purposes. According to Ld. DR, the fact that the assessee Trust was earlier registered under this Act substantiated

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

III of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, the Ld. DR pointed out that, in terms of Section 9, any trust whose purpose was exclusively for religious teaching or worship, would not qualify as a public trust for charitable purposes. According to Ld. DR, the fact that the assessee Trust was earlier registered under this Act substantiated

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

III of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, the Ld. DR pointed out that, in terms of Section 9, any trust whose purpose was exclusively for religious teaching or worship, would not qualify as a public trust for charitable purposes. According to Ld. DR, the fact that the assessee Trust was earlier registered under this Act substantiated

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

iii) of the second proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act 2. The facts of the case are that, the assessee is a public charitable trust

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

iii) of the second proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act 2. The facts of the case are that, the assessee is a public charitable trust

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, ()

Charitable And 20,00,000 80G 50% 10,00,000 Welfare Trust 3 School For Deaf Mutes 15,00,000 80G 50% 7,50,000 Society 4 Andh Kanya Prakash 5,00,000 80G 50% 2,50,000 Gruh 5 Samvedana 5,00,000 80G 50% 2,50,000 6 Family Planning 5,00,000 80G 100% 5

SUBHARMA CHARITABLE TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEM), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2025-26

trust inadvertently filed the application under clause (ii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act instead of filing the same under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act, since it already had provisional approval. The learned AR submitted that no 4 Subharma Charitable

SMT NEELADEVI SURAJMAL BOTHRA CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for 7

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2024-25 Smt. Neeladevi Surajmal Bothra Cit (Exemption), Charitable Trust, Room No. 601, 6Th Floor, 24B Miniland, Bhandup (West), Vs. Cumballa Hill Mtnl Te Building, Mumbai-400078. Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aapts 0255 A Appellant Respondent

iii) of sub-section (5) of section 80G. section (5) of section 80G. During the pendency of this application, the assessee sought to During the pendency of this application, the assessee sought to During the pendency of this application, the assessee sought to rectify the mistake by filing another application on 17.12.2024. The rectify the mistake by filing another application

RAMKRISHNA BAJAJ CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 26(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

III). Section 10 deals with incomes not included in total income whereas section 11 deals with income from property held for charitable or religious purposes. We have not found anything in the language of the two provisions nor was Mr. Malhotra able to point out as to how when certain income is not to be included in computing total income

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

In the result, both the appe

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

5 3532/MUM/2025 Jinseva Foundation Jinseva Foundation purposes in India. But even the said section does not completely rule out exemption to purposes in India. But even the said section does not completely rule out exemption to purposes in India. But even the said section does not completely rule out exemption to incomes applied outside Indi incomes applied outside India

SHETH VIJILAL LAXMIDAS TRIBVONDAS KESARBAI VIJILAL POONA CONVALCENT HOME,PUNE vs. ITO (EXEM) WARD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2025-26

Charitable Trust, which is rendering meritorious services and providing marvelous services for which it is established; 9. The Appellant Trust should get the benefit of 80G since the Trust is fully depending on Donations to meet the benevolent cause;” 3. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. The brief facts

SAVITA OIL TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC-8(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1258/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Savita Oil Technologies बिधम/ Acit, Central Circle-8(4) Ltd. Room No. 659, Aayakar Vs. 66/67, Nariman Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai- New Marine Line, 400021. Mumbai-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs3513J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Yogesh Thar/Chaitanya Joshi Revenue By: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia (Sr. Ar) Shri Virabhadra Mahanjan (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/07/2023/ (20/10/2023) घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/10/2023 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-50, Mumbai Dated 24.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The First Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee Is As Under: - “1(A) The Appellant Submits That The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [(“Cit(A)”)] Erred In Not Allowing The Claim Towards Expenditure On Account Of Gratuity Representing Amount Actual Paid To An Approved Gratuity Fund Of Rs.83,69,981/- Representing Employer'S Contribution. (B) The Appellant Submits That Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Aforesaid Amount Of Rs.83,69,981/- Was Paid On Or Before The Due Date For Filing Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2017-18 To An Approved Gratuity Fund

trust.” 7. Section 43B of the Act which reads as under: - Certain deductions to be only on actual payment. 43B. Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, a deduction otherwise allowable under this Act in respect of- (a) ……. 7 A.Y. 2017-18 Savita Oil Technologies Ltd (b) any sum payable by the assessee as an employer

TRIMURTI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,THANE vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, THANE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokartrimurti Educational Ito, Exemption Charitable Trust Ward 202/12 Tulsidham, Vs. Qureshi Mansion, Ghodbundar Road, Thane, Thane Mumbai- 400607 Pan/Gir No. Aaatt9677N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri P P Jayaraman Revenue By Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026

charitable activities. The trust is registered under section 12A of the Act and such registration is valid up to A.Y. 2026–27. The assessee was also granted provisional approval under section 80G(5) of the Act in Form No.10AC vide order dated 31.12.2022, which was valid up to A.Y. 2025–26. 3. In terms of the amended provisions of section

COTAAP RESERCH FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhancotaap Research Foundation Cit(Exemptions), Cotton Exchange Building, 2Nd Floor, R. No. 601, 6Th Floor, Cumbulla Opp. Cotton Green Railway Station, Vs. Hill, Mtnl Building, Pedder Cotton Green (East), Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Mumbai-400 033 Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai, Pan: Aaatc0052A Maharashtra – 400 026

iii) of 1st proviso of sub section (5) of section 80G of the Act and held that as per the said provision, the trust should have applied either within six months of start of activities or at least six months prior to expiry of the period of the provisional approval i.e. before September 2023 whichever is earlier. He further observed

PAW PETS FOUNDATION,PALGHAR, THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) 1(3), THANE

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Trust.” 2. The assessee filed the application in Form 10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act before the CIT(E) on 17.11.2022. The CIT(E) rejected the application stating that the assessee has not filed the present application within the time allowed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5

SETH WALCHAND HIRACHAND MEMORIAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) II(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be Allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

80G of the Act. The assessee claimed the exemption u/s.11 of the Act and claimed an amount of Rs.2,83,801/- as accumulation u/s.11(1)(a) of the Act being 15% of the gross receipts which was not allowed as no income remains after deducting the regular administrative expenditure and expenses towards the application of object. It was also found