AMRUT PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokaramrut Public Charitable Ito Exemption Trust Ward 1(1), Block 4, Plot No. 578A, Vs. Cumballa Hill, Jitendra Bldg, Pedder Road, Jamejamshed Road, Mumbai-400 026 Matunga, Mumbai- 400 019 Pan/Gir No.Aaata4810A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri P. P. Jayaraman, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.01.2026

condone the delay in filing the assessee’s application in Form No. 10AB, the same having been satisfactorily explained as bona fide and unintentional; and ii. The learned CIT(Exemptions) shall thereafter examine the assessee’s application for approval under section 80G(5

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

section 80G(5). 20. This aspect, when viewed cumulatively with the bona fide explanation offered by the assessee and the absence of any adverse finding on merits, fortifies our conclusion that the impugned order cannot be sustained. 21. Accordingly, in view of the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, and for the reasons discussed hereinabove, we set aside

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

5 & 6, Coop Hill, MTNL Building,\nHsg. Soc Ltd, JVLR, Andheri E, Cumballa Hill, Dr.Gopalrao\nMumbai-400 093\nDeshmukh Marg, Mumbai,\nPAN: AAPCM1543G\nMaharashtra – 400 026\n(Appellant)\n(Respondent)\nAssessee Represented by\nShri K. Shivaram & Ms.\nNeelam Jadhav, Ld. AR\nDepartment Represented by\nShri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui,\nLd. DR\nDate of conclusion of Hearing\n16.07.2025\nDate of Pronouncement\n14.10.2025

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

ii) of subsection (5) and Explanation 3, an institution or fund which incurs expenditure, during any previous year, which is of a religious nature for an amount not exceeding five per cent. of its total income in that previous year shall be deemed to be an institution or fund to which the provisions of this section apply." The aforesaid provision

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

ii) of subsection (5) and Explanation 3, an institution or fund which incurs expenditure, during any previous year, which is of a religious nature for an amount not exceeding five per cent. of its total income in that previous year shall be deemed to be an institution or fund to which the provisions of this section apply." The aforesaid provision

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

ii) of subsection (5) and Explanation 3, an institution or fund which incurs expenditure, during any previous year, which is of a religious nature for an amount not exceeding five per cent. of its total income in that previous year shall be deemed to be an institution or fund to which the provisions of this section apply." The aforesaid provision

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

ii) of subsection (5) and Explanation 3, an institution or fund which incurs expenditure, during any previous year, which is of a religious nature for an amount not exceeding five per cent. of its total income in that previous year shall be deemed to be an institution or fund to which the provisions of this section apply." The aforesaid provision

NILESH KULKARNI FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm& Ms Padmavathy S, Am

delay is not condoned and that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 11 of the Act. In our considered view, the application for registration under section 80G has to considered as per the provisions of subsection 6 Nilesh Kulkarni Foundation (5) of the said section, which in the present case has not been carried

SHRI RAM EK DHARMADA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarshri Ram Ek V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax Dharmada Trust बनाम (Exemption), Mumbai, 601, 6Th 9, Babulnath Road, Floor, Cumballa Hill, Mtnl Te Chowpatty Road, Mumbai Building, Peddar Road, Dr. 400 007, Maharashtra Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill Mumbai 400026, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aahts2280D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

ii) in the form instead of sub-clause (iii) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5). However, the form was still filed under the correct section, i.e., Section 80G(5) of the Act.The first notice was issued by the department on March 17, 2025, requesting certain information, which was duly submitted on March 24, 2025. There was no mention

NARKE GREEN FOUNDATION CHARITABLE INSTITUTION,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION) , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

5. The only issue in this appeal is against the order of Ld.CIT(A) rejecting form 10AB filed by the assessee on 29/07/2024 treating it to be belated. 5.1. It is noted that the timeline prescribed for filing Form No. 10AB for registration u/s.12A/80G was extended to 30/06/2024 by CBDT Circular No.7/2024 dated 25/04/2024, after considering genuine hardship faced

AARAMBH YOGA FOUNDATION,MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA vs. ITO WARD - 42(1)(1), MUMBAI, KAUTILYA BHAVAN, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2026-27

delay is condoned. 3. Coming to the merits of the case, we observe that the Assessee was holding provisional registration/approval under section 80G of the Act dated 12.5.2022 and therefore, in order to regularize the provisional approval, filed an application in Form 10 AB on 31.01.2025, which was taken into consideration by the Ld. Commissioner and rejected vide impugned order

BHAGWATI FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailbhagwati Foundation, 1304, Regent Chambers, Jamnalal Bajaj Road, Nariman Point, ............... Appellant Mumbai-400021. Pan : Aadtb3235B V/S Cit(Exemptions), Cumballa Hill, ……………… Respondent Mtnl Telephone Exchange Building, Pedder Road, Dr Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai – 400026. Assessee By : Shri Priyank Ghia Revenue By : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Sr.Dr

delay ought to have been condoned in the interest of justice, particularly when there is no malafide intent or lapse on the part of the trust. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT(E) has erred in not considering that the appellant had held certificate u/s 80G of the Act prior to the insertion of the amendment effective

SHRIJAL WELFARE FOUNDATION,SANTACRUZ (EAST) vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) MUMBAI, CUMBALLA HILL

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

5 of the Limitation Act. evaluating sufficiency of cause for condonation of delay, the Hon’ble evaluating sufficiency of cause for condonation of delay, the Hon’ble evaluating sufficiency of cause for condonation of delay, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition v. lector of Land Acquisition v. Supreme Court in the case

SHRIJAL WELFARE FOUNDATION,SANTACRUZ (EAST) vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) MUMBAI, CUMABALLA HILL

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

5 of the Limitation Act. evaluating sufficiency of cause for condonation of delay, the Hon’ble evaluating sufficiency of cause for condonation of delay, the Hon’ble evaluating sufficiency of cause for condonation of delay, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition v. lector of Land Acquisition v. Supreme Court in the case

THE ANJUMANE TAIYEBI,MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2022-23 The Anjumanetaiyebi Cit Exemption Husaini Masjid Bldg 1St Floor Room No. 601 6Thflr, 66-68 Husainiyah Ma, Mandvi Post Vs. Camballahill,Mtnl Building, Office, Mumbai- 400013 Pedder Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai-400013 Pan No. Aaata 000 7 H Appellant Respondent

5. That due to an inadvertent clerical error and a misunderstanding of procedural requirements, the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed period. 6. That a re-application for re-registration under Section 80G was made on 12/12/2024, accompanied by a request for condonation of delay. However, this application was not processed. The professional handling the application continuously tracked

ACIT-6(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailaditya Birla Sun Life Amc Ltd., Tower 1, Jupiter Mill Compound, 17Th Floor, One World Center, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400013 Pan : Aaacb6134D V/S

II, raised in assessee’s appeal, pertains to the disallowance of deduction claimed by the assessee on expenses disallowed under section 40(a) of the Act in previous years. 6. The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue, as emanating from the record, are: During the year under consideration, the assessee filed its original return of income

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

delay in filing the appeals is condoned.\n4. Now, we take up the appeal of the Revenue for assessment\nyear 2019-2020. The grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced\nas under:\n1. \"Whether the contribution or donation made by assessee not\nvoluntarily, but to discharge legal obligation arising from section 135\nof the Company's Act r.w. schedule

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

delay in filing the appeals is condoned.\n4. Now, we take up the appeal of the Revenue for assessment\nyear 2019-2020. The grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced\nas under:\n1. \"Whether the contribution or donation made by assessee not\nvoluntarily, but to discharge legal obligation arising from Section 135\nof the Company's Act r.w. schedule

JASHWANT SHAH CHARITABLE TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS MUMBAI , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusethjashwant Shah Charitable Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Trust, A-Aidun Building, 1St (Exemptions), Mumbai. Room No.601, 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill Dhobi Talao Lane, John Crasto Lane, Mumbai- Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Dr. 400002. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400026. Pan/Gir No:Aaatj0479Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Jitendra Singh, Advocate Respondent By Shri Vivek Perampurna (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.02.2026

Section 80G(5)(ii) and 80G(5B) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(E), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR of the appellant filed an affidavit by Shri Mayank Jaswantlal Shah, trustee of the applicant for the delay of 154 days in filing the application. In the affidavit