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

iv)(B) of section 80G(5), so as to advance the cause of substantial justice. 14. The learned AR thus prayed that the delay in filing Form No. 10AB be condoned

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

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

iv) to give aids to the poor and deserving at Shirdi provided donations are received" Specifically in that behalf (and for no other purpose) and also to give necessary assistance inclusive of financial help to the poor and deserving institute at Shirdi elsewhere" 22. It is noted that amongst the several objects of the assessee Trust, one of the objects

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

iv) to give aids to the poor and deserving at Shirdi provided donations are received" Specifically in that behalf (and for no other purpose) and also to give necessary assistance inclusive of financial help to the poor and deserving institute at Shirdi elsewhere" 22. It is noted that amongst the several objects of the assessee Trust, one of the objects

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

iv) to give aids to the poor and deserving at Shirdi provided donations are received" Specifically in that behalf (and for no other purpose) and also to give necessary assistance inclusive of financial help to the poor and deserving institute at Shirdi elsewhere" 22. It is noted that amongst the several objects of the assessee Trust, one of the objects

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

iv) to give aids to the poor and deserving at Shirdi provided donations are received" Specifically in that behalf (and for no other purpose) and also to give necessary assistance inclusive of financial help to the poor and deserving institute at Shirdi elsewhere" 22. It is noted that amongst the several objects of the assessee Trust, one of the objects

BLOSSOM CHARITABLE TRUST,THANE vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

iv) of the first proviso to section\n80G(5) on 28.03.2025. The assessee was earlier granted\nprovisional approval under section 80G(5) with effect from F.Y.\n2021-22.\n4.\nThe CIT(E) observed that in terms of clause (iii) of the first\nproviso to section 80G(5), an institution having provisional\napproval is required to file application for regular approval

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

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

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. As regards the grounds raised in the appeal, the Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that an inadvertent error occurred while filing the application in Form No. 10AB for registration under Section 80G. She explained that in the said application, the assessee erroneously selected clause (ii) of the first proviso

SURYA KIRAN HEALTH & EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

iv)(B). The assessee subsequently submitted the second application on 18.10.2024 under correct section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. The ld. CIT(E) has also refused to condone the delay

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

condone the minor clerical error as well as the delay in filing, set aside the rejection order and direct the ld.CIT(E) to process the application on merits under the correct sub-clause (iii) of Section 80G(5) of the Act. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and carefully perused the records. We note that the application

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, 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

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

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

delay of 4 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue is condoned. 15. The issue arising in Ground No.1, raised in Revenue’s appeal, pertains to the deduction claimed under section 80G of the Act on Corporate Social Responsibility (“CSR”) expenses. 16. The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue, as emanating from the record, are: During

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

SHRI SATGURU SAINATH CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

iv)(B). The assessee subsequently submitted the second application on 29.11.2024 under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. The said application was also rejected by the CIT(E) stating that the assessee has not shown a reasonable cause for delay in filing the application and the CIT(E) did not condone