DAMANI WELFARE AND CULTURAL ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

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

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

Section 119 to avoid genuine hardship in the matter of filing of audit report in Form 10B has issued various circulars empowering the authorities at the level of CITs and above to condone the delay in filing of Form 10B for A.Y.2018-19 and subsequent years, then such authorities should condone the delay following the judicial precedents laid down

LOKUMAL KISHINCHAND CHARITY TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assesseeis allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Lokumal Kishinchand Charity Trust Ito Exemption Ward-1(4), 629-A, Gazdar House, 3Rd Floor, Vs Mumbai J Shanker Seth Marg, Dhobi Talao, Mumbai – 400002. [Pan No. Aaatl2570L] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

delay may be condoned and assessing officer may be directed to allow benefit of section 11 to the assessee. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the following decision:  Sarvodaya Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) (2021) 125

ROTARY CLUB OF BOMBAY QUEENS NECKLACE CHARITABLE TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Bijayananda Prusethrotary Club Of Bombay Vs Ito (Exem.) Ward 2(2), Mumbai Queens Necklace Charitable Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road Trust Mumbai-400020 B 41/45, Paragon Centre, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aaatr4200K Appellant Respondent

delay is not condoned, there will be genuine hardship to the Petitioner, inasmuch as, the Petitioner would be denied the exemption otherwise claimed under the provisions of Section 11 of the IT Act and which is a substantial amount. In the view that we take, we are supported by a decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court

MIG CRICKET CLUB,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(E)-2, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year : 2014-15 Mig Cricket Club, Dcit(E)-2, Mig Colony, Mtnl Building, Mig Cricket Club, Vs. Cumballa Hill, Ramkrishna Paramhans Marg, Mumbai-400026. Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Pan : Aaatm4779J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Anil Sathe For Revenue : Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 27-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2025

125 taxmann.com 75/278 Taxman 148 (Gujarat) as well as the decision in case of Social Security Scheme of GICEA (supra) to uphold the decision of the CIT (Appeals), wherein this Court has held that the approach of the authority in such type of cases should be equitable, balancing and judicious. In the facts of the case, when the assessee

SHREE GURUDEV DATTA MANDIR TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee isallowed in above terms for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanshree Gurudev Datta Mandir Cit(Exemptions)/Ito Trust Ward 2(3), Datta Mandir Compound, Datta Vs. R. No. 601, 6Th Floor, Cumbulla Mandir Road, Vakola Pipeline, Hill, Mtnl Building, Santacruz East, Mumbai-400 055 Cumballa Hill, Mumbai, Pan: Aaats8130R Maharashtra – 400 026

section 119 of the Act empowers the CBDT to issue orders and instructions to subordinate income tax authorities regarding condonation of delay to the tax payers who have missed statutory deadlines due to genuine hardship. Since the Parliament has already granted the power to the PCIT /CIT for condonation of delay, there is no need of approaching the CBDT

KISHOR JETHALAL MORBIA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 27 (2)(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed in the above terms

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanvs. Assessing Officer, Kishor Jethalal Morbia Assessment Unit, 304/310, Kailas Plaza, Income Tax Vallabh Baug Lane, Department Ghatkopar (East), Jurisdictional Mumbai-400 075 Assessing Officer, Ito 27(2)(1), Vashi Railway Station, Vashi Navi Mumbai- 400 703 Pan/Gir No. Aabpm4447J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anant N. Pai, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.07.2025 आदेश / Order Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm:

delay in filing the appeal is accordingly condoned. The brief facts as culled out from the proceeding 7. before the lower authorities are that the assessee is an individual, has filed return of income for the year under consideration on 20.09.2018 declaring total income at Rs. 53,84,950/-. However as per the information available on record, the assessee

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST. JOSEPH ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal is allowed, in the above terms

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Girish Agrawal

125 taxmann.com 75 (Guj.) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has also dealt with the identical issue qua filing of Form 10B belatedly, however, in that case the Assessee approached the Appropriate Authority u/s 119(2b) of the Act for condonation of delay in filing of Form 10B. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court by considering the issue, held

SHRI BHAGWANDAS RAMDASJI CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION-2(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kanta N D Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Bhagwandas Ito (Exemption)-2(3), Ramdasji Charitable & Mumbai Religious Trust, Ground Floor, Oricon House, 1076, Vs. Dr E Moses Road, Mumbai- 400 018 Pan: Aabts 4907 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

125 taxmann.com 75 (Guj.) the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has also dealt with the identical issue qua filing of Form 10B belatedly, however, in that case the Assessee approached the Appropriate Authority u/s 119(2b) of the Act for condonation of delay in filing of Form 10B. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court by considering the issue, held

SMT LAXMIDEVI SOMANI PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

125 taxmann.com 75 (Guj.) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has also dealt with the identical issue qua filing of Form 10B belatedly, however, in that case the Assessee approached the Appropriate Authority u/s 119(2b) of the Act for condonation of delay in filing of Form 10B. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court by considering the Issue, held

ACIL NAVASAR JAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEM) WARD1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16

condonation of delay in uploading or efiling the form No. 10 uploading or efiling the form No. 10 the authority has been giv has been given to the Commissioner of Income the Commissioner of Income-tax Exemption, But the case of the tax Exemption, But the case of the assessee pertains to period prior to AY 2016 assessee pertains

SHRI JAMANLAL N GULATI HUF ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, 20(2), MUMBAI

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

125 days in filing of appeal in E- form 35 and - has further erred in not considering the explanation of the appellant, even through no objection was raised for filing of form 35 in physical form.\n\n4. The assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is ab initio void, inasmuch as, no notice

SMOLLAN INDIA CSR FOUNDATION,NAVI MUMBAI vs. CPC - ITO (EXEMPTION) 2(3) , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am Smollan India Csr Foundation Centralised Processing Dakshina, 5Th Floor, Plot No.2, Centre/Income Tax Officer Sector 11, Cbd Belapur, Vs. (Exemption) 2(3) Navi Mumbai-400 614 Mumbai

section 44AB of the Act. 6. Further, the ld. CIT(A) has also directed the ld. CIT(Exemption) to condone the delay in Form 10B after considering the condonation petition filed by the assessee before the ld. A.O. on 05.05.2023 and to grant exemption u/s. 11 of the Act if the delay is condoned. 7. The assessee is in appeal

R.C.CHURCH OF ST. JOSEPHS,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Prabhash Shankar(Physical Hearing) R.C. Church Of St. Josephs Ito Exemption Ward-2(2), St. Joseph R.C. Church, Robert Vs Mumbai Road, Colaba, Mumbai – 400005. [Pan No. Aaatr3519F] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

delay in filing Form-10B, may be condoned and assessing officer may be directed to allow benefit of section 11 to the assessee. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the following decision:  Sarvodaya Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) (2021) 125

R.C SCHOOL OF ST. TERESAS,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Prabhash Shankar(Physical Hearing) R.C. Church Of St. Josephs Ito Exemption Ward-2(2), St. Joseph R.C. Church, Robert Vs Mumbai Road, Colaba, Mumbai – 400005. [Pan No. Aaatr3519F] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

delay in filing Form-10B, may be condoned and assessing officer may be directed to allow benefit of section 11 to the assessee. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the following decision:  Sarvodaya Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) (2021) 125

DCIT CEN CIR 4(3) , MUMBAI vs. GROWMORE LEASING & INVESTMENT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6092, 6093 & 6091/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Growmore Leasing & बिधम/ Dcit Cen Cir 4(3) Investment Ltd. Room No. 1921, Air India Vs. 32 Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Bldg, 19Th Floor, Nariman Floor, Dr. A. B. Rd, Worli, Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400018. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6213, 6214 & 6215/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dcit Cen Cir 4(3) बिधम/ Growmore Leasing & Room No. 1921, Air India Investment Ltd. Vs. Bldg, 19Th Floor, Nariman 32 Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Point, Mumbai-400021. Floor, Dr. A. B. Rd, Worli, Mumbai-400018. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abapm4491J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Mitali Gopani Revenue By: Dr. P. Daniel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/09/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -52, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita. No.6092/Mum/2018

condone the delay and admit the appeal filed by the assessee. 60. Ground No. 1 relates to the claim of interest by the assessee amounting to `1,43,721/- after disallowing proportionate interest amounting to `2,12,47,194/- out of interest earned by the assessee on term deposits. Both the parties agreed that similar issue has arisen

GROWMORE LEASING & INVESTMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 4(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6092, 6093 & 6091/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Growmore Leasing & बिधम/ Dcit Cen Cir 4(3) Investment Ltd. Room No. 1921, Air India Vs. 32 Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Bldg, 19Th Floor, Nariman Floor, Dr. A. B. Rd, Worli, Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400018. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6213, 6214 & 6215/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dcit Cen Cir 4(3) बिधम/ Growmore Leasing & Room No. 1921, Air India Investment Ltd. Vs. Bldg, 19Th Floor, Nariman 32 Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Point, Mumbai-400021. Floor, Dr. A. B. Rd, Worli, Mumbai-400018. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abapm4491J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Mitali Gopani Revenue By: Dr. P. Daniel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/09/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -52, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita. No.6092/Mum/2018

condone the delay and admit the appeal filed by the assessee. 60. Ground No. 1 relates to the claim of interest by the assessee amounting to `1,43,721/- after disallowing proportionate interest amounting to `2,12,47,194/- out of interest earned by the assessee on term deposits. Both the parties agreed that similar issue has arisen

THE NASIK ST. XAVIERS SOCIETY ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2023-24

condone such delay, as per section 119(2b) of the Act. 4. The Assessee being aggrieved, has preferred the instant appeal before us and submitted that Form 10B was filed prior to filing of return of income on dated 30.11.2023 and even otherwise 3 M/s. The Nasik ST. Xavier’s Society Form 10B of the Act was available

NEW BOMBAY MERCHANTS EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CPC BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of assesseeis allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhri(Physical Hearing) New Bombay Merchants Educational Acit (E),-2(2), Mumbai Foundation, Vs The Sugar Market Assc. 1St Floor, Central Facility Bldg Fam Market 1, Phase 2, Turbhe Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra-400703. [Pan No. Aaatn2984J] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pradeep Kapasi Ca Revenue By Ms. Sujatha Iyangar, Sr. Dr Date Of Institution Of Appeal 18.04.2025 Date Of Hearing 02.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11.06.2025 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

condoning the delay. The ld. AR submits that in a series of decision including the decision of Gujarat High Court Sarvodaya Charitable Trust Vs ITO (E) (2021) 125 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat) held that has held that where the assessee-trust for past many years had substantially satisfied conditions for claiming exemption under section