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

12A of the Act, up to 30/09/2023. up to 30/09/2023. Thus, no further extension of time has been granted ther extension of time has been granted for application under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub for application under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section (5) of section 80G of the Act vide the said

SHA HURGOWAN ANANDJI DESAI CHARITIES ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC , BENGULURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2022-23 Sha Hurgowan Anandji Desai Dy. Director Of Income-Tax, Cpc Charities, Bengaluru, 18, Bhaskar Lane, Bhuleshwar, Vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400002. Ward 2(3), 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaats 0405 R Appellant Respondent

delay may kindly be condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the Appellant. Appellant. 4. 4. Without prejudice to the above, 4. Without prejudice to the above, it is submitted that on the facts

RAAHAT HUMANITARIAN FOUDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee i

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2024-25 Raahat Humanitarian Foundation, Cit (Exemptions), A 204, Zubaida Park, Behind Simla Room No. 601, 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill Vs. Park, Old Mumbai Pune Road, Mtnl Te Building Pedder Road, Dr Kausa Mumbra, Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Thane-400612. Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaetr 9830 K Appellant Respondent

condone such delay and such application shall be deemed to ation shall be deemed to have been filed within time;] have been filed within time;]” 6.2 The process of granting registration process of granting registration for application of the for application of the category under section 12A

CAREGIVER SAATHI FOUNDATION,GOREGAON MUMBAI vs. DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BENGLURU, DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BENGLURU

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2022-23 Caregiver Saathi Foundation, Dy. Cit, Cpc 1703, Sienna Tower Wing-B, Lodha Bengluru-560100. Vs. Florenza, Western Express Highway N Ext, To Hub Mall, Goregaon, Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aaicc 5644 B Appellant Respondent

12A(1)(b) of the I.T.Act which is the time limit as per sec 139(1).The appellant has failed the time limit as per sec 139(1).The appellant has failed the time limit as per sec 139(1).The appellant has failed to fulfill the conditions for allowing accumulation of to fulfill the conditions for allowing accumulation

AADIVASI WELFARE FOUNDATION,JHARKHAND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalaadivasi Welfare Foundation, Plot No. 8185, Sri Krishna Road, Near Srinath University, Dindli Basti, Majhitola, Adityapur, Pan No. Aarca5995N ...... Appellant Vs. Ao (Exem.) Ward-1(1), Pratistha Bhavan, Church Gate, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 ..... Respondent

condone the delay on filing the Form 10B for the relevant assessment year under consideration in accordance with CBDT Circular 16/2022 dated 19-07-2022. Copy of is attached herewith for your reference. In this regard, we would like to bring your attention that the delay in filing the Form 10B only for a period of 13 days caused

D K AJMERA FOUNDATION TRUST,MUMBAI-400077 vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Us Also Falls Within The Covid Period. Pursuant To The Relaxation Granted By The Hon’Ble Supreme Court, We Are Inclined To Condone The Delay In Filing Of The Appeals By The Assessee & Admit The Same For Adjudication.

condone the delay of 326 days. Ground No. 2: a. The Hon. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax / Commissioner erred in passing "order for provisional registration" in Form 10AC Order for Provisional registration in Form 10AC under Sub clause (i) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A

D K AJMERA FOUNDATION TRUST,MUMBAI-400077 vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Us Also Falls Within The Covid Period. Pursuant To The Relaxation Granted By The Hon’Ble Supreme Court, We Are Inclined To Condone The Delay In Filing Of The Appeals By The Assessee & Admit The Same For Adjudication.

condone the delay of 326 days. Ground No. 2: a. The Hon. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax / Commissioner erred in passing "order for provisional registration" in Form 10AC Order for Provisional registration in Form 10AC under Sub clause (i) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A

ADVAYA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION (NOW BTG ADVAYA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION),MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI , MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

condonation of delay in filing Form 10AB: and the application for renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii), holding

SHREE PUSHKAR FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)-WARD 2(30, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shree Pushkar Foundation, Ito (Exemption) – Ward 2(3), 301/302, 3Rd Floor, Cumbala Hill Tele Exchange Atlanta Centre, Vs. (Mtnl), Peddar Rd, Tardeo, Near Udyog Bhavan, Mumbai-400026. Sonawala Road, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aawts 2303 N Appellant Respondent

12A of the Shree Pushkar Foundation Shree Pu 3 Act and prescribed Form No. 10B on 15.02.2022 (on the due date). Act and prescribed Form No. 10B on 15.02.2022 (on the du Act and prescribed Form No. 10B on 15.02.2022 (on the du Further, the assessee was required to file Form No. 10, which is a Further, the assessee

AMAN CHAMBERS PREMISES CO-OP SOC LTD,CHARNI ROAD MUMBAI vs. THE ASS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX BENGALURU, BENGALURU

12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015", "Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881", "Section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963" ], "issues": "Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals on the grounds of limitation without sufficient cause for condonation of delay

MOHANJI BHARAT WELFARE FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes in above terms

delay in filing Form 10AB, whether the same can be\ncondoned by this Tribunal or same can also be condoned by Ld.\nCIT(E) under the proviso of section 12A

AMAN CHAMBERS PREMISES CO-OP SOC. LTD.,CHARNI ROAD MUMBAI vs. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX , BENGALURU

In the result, ITA No. 2077/MUM/2024, ITA No

12A of the Commercial\nCourts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable\nInstruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of\nlimitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court\nor tribunal can condone delay

AMAN CHAMBERS PREMISES CO-OP SOC LTD.,CHARNI ROAD MUMBAI vs. THE ASSITANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX , BENGALURU

In the result, ITA No. 2077/MUM/2024, ITA No

12A of the Commercial\nCourts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable\nInstruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of\nlimitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court\nor tribunal can condone delay

SHREE DADAR JAIN PAUSHADHSHALA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E_ - 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2061/Mum/2019 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Shree Dadar Jain Ito(E)-1(2) Paushadhshala Trust, Room No. 501, 5 Th Floor, Aaradhana Bhavan, Piramal Chambers, V. 289, S K Bole Road, Lalbaug, Parel, Dadar West, Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400028 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaats7848E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri. Bhadresh Doshi Revenue By: Shri. Abhi Rama Karthikeyn S. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 2061/Mum/2019, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 08/02/2019, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖) In Appeal Number Cit(A)-3/It-10394/2017-18, For Assessment Year 2014-15, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 28.12.2006 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay:2014-15. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By Assessee In Memo Of Appeal Filed With The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Tribunal‖) Read As Under:-

12A was inserted by Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2018, which reads as under: “[(ba) the person in receipt of the income has furnished the return of income for the previous year in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (4A) of section 139, within the time allowed under that section.]” 8.16 We are presently concerned with

BHAKTI TRUST,MUMBAI-400088 vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

condone the delay of 326 days. Ground No. 2 a. The Hon Principal Commissioner of Income Tax / Commissioner erred in passing "order for provisional registration in Form 10AC Order for Provisional registration in Form 10AC under Sub clause (1) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A

CHETANA ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION) , 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 () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Chetana, Cit (Exemptions), Survey No. 341, Chetana College, 601, 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill Vs. Government Colony, Bandra East, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400051. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatc 3012 A Appellant Respondent

Section 10(23C) on 21.08.2024—i.e., after the extended timeline. i.e., after the extended timeline. While the CIT(E) noted that the assessee had not furnished While the CIT(E) noted that the assessee had not furnished While the CIT(E) noted that the assessee had not furnished adequate documentary proof regarding its activi adequate documentary proof regarding its activities

MS. ANAGHA AMAR AINAPURE,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 2664/Mum/2024 is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

12A and 80G provisionally. Finally, the assessee filed Form 10A before the ld. CIT(E) for final registration under section 80G of the Act. But due to noncompliance before the CIT(E), the Ld.CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s application. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. The appeal was filed with a delay of 17 months

SHALEM ASSEMBLIES OF GOD MISSION,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 2664/Mum/2024 is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

12A and 80G provisionally. Finally, the assessee filed Form 10A before the ld. CIT(E) for final registration under section 80G of the Act. But due to noncompliance before the CIT(E), the Ld.CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s application. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. The appeal was filed with a delay of 17 months

NISHRIN BOOKWALA MEMORIAL CANCER AID TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 12A(1)(ac) (ac) of the Act a proviso has been inserted has been inserted by way of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 by way of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 with effect from 1/10 10/24 which authorise the Commissioner of /24 which authorise the Commissioner of Income-tax Exemption tax Exemption to condone delay