ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAUTILYA BHAVAN, BKC, MUMBAI vs. TATA EDUCATION TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

12A of the Act and eligible for claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Act no exemption u/s. 10(34) and 10(35) of the Act is admissible. We find identical issue arose in assessee’s case in AY 2012-13 and while deciding the issue in the order referred to above, the Coordinate Bench has held as under

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

12A of the Act and eligible for claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Act no exemption u/s. 10(34) and 10(35) of the Act is admissible. We find identical issue arose in assessee’s case in AY 2012-13 and while deciding the issue in the order referred to above, the Coordinate Bench has held as under

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 17(3), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

12A of the Act and eligible for claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Act no exemption u/s. 10(34) and 10(35) of the Act is admissible. We find identical issue arose in assessee’s case in AY 2012-13 and while deciding the issue in the order referred to above, the Coordinate Bench has held as under

TATA EDUCATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-17(3), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed

depreciation and also capital expenditure viz addition to fixed\nassets in the computation of income which amounted to double\ndeduction.\n(v) The appellant prays that the order of the A.O. should be restored and\norder of the CIT(A) should be set aside.\"\n6.\nFrom a perusal of the aforesaid grounds raised by the revenue in the\nGroup Trust

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -17(3), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed

depreciation and also capital expenditure viz addition to fixed\nassets in the computation of income which amounted to double\ndeduction.\n(v) The appellant prays that the order of the A.O. should be restored and\norder of the CIT(A) should be set aside.\"\n6.\nFrom a perusal of the aforesaid grounds raised by the revenue in the\nGroup Trust

TATA EDUCATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-17(3), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed

depreciation and also capital expenditure viz addition to fixed\nassets in the computation of income which amounted to double\ndeduction.\n(v) The appellant prays that the order of the A.O. should be restored and\norder of the CIT(A) should be set aside.\"\n6. From a perusal of the aforesaid grounds raised by the revenue in the\nGroup Trust

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEPTION) -CIRCLE 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed

depreciation and also capital expenditure viz addition to fixed\nassets in the computation of income which amounted to double\ndeduction.\n(v) The appellant prays that the order of the A.O. should be restored and\norder of the CIT(A) should be set aside.\"\n6. From a perusal of the aforesaid grounds raised by the revenue in the\nGroup Trust

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 26(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. TATA EDUCATION TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed

depreciation and also capital expenditure viz addition to fixed\nassets in the computation of income which amounted to double\ndeduction.\n\n(v) The appellant prays that the order of the A.O. should be restored and\norder of the CIT(A) should be set aside.\"\n\n6. From a perusal of the aforesaid grounds raised by the revenue

ULTRA TECH CEMENT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. CIT CC-1(4), MUMBAI

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

12A) of the Act and had denied the claim of deduction u/s.80IA of the Act to the assessee company. 8 M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd. (Successor to M/s.Samruddhi Cement Ltd.) 4.5. The ld. AR pointed out that this assessment framed on 27/03/2018 is barred by limitation as it is in violation of provisions of Section

YASH DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 27(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Yash Developers, Dcit-27(3), 1St Flr Anand, 7Th Road, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Maryland Apartment, D.K. Vs. Station Complex, Sandhu Marg, Chembur, Vashi-400703 Mumbai-400071. Pan No. Aaafy 6171 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Mandar Vaidya, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Harmesh Lal, Dr : Date Of Hearing 23/02/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/03/2023 Order

12A of the Act and not the initial of the Act and not the initial assessment orders. assessment orders. (Emphasis supplied)" supplied)" 14. What follows from the aforesaid is that after the 14. What follows from the aforesaid is that after the 14. What follows from the aforesaid is that after the rectification order, initial order of assessment ceases

KAMAL CLEARING AND FORWARDING AGENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(3)(3), , MUMBAI

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA ( (Accountant Member)

depreciation on the assets acquired by the respondents-assessees. It is a matter of record that all the assessees are charitable institutions registered under Section 12A

MAHESHWARI PRAGATI MANDAL,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blemaheshwari Pragati Mandal V. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre 2Nd Floor Maheshwari Bhavan Delhi Girgaon Road, Kalbadevi Mumbai-400002 Pan: Aaatm0226G (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation on the assets acquired by the respondents-assessees. It is a matter of record that all the assessees are charitable institutions registered under section 12A

MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,BANDRA RECLAMATION vs. DCIT (EXEM) - 2, MUMBAI, PEDDER ROAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

12A of the Income Tax Act (the Act). The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2016-17 on 12.10.2016 declaring Nil income after claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act making additions towards notional rental income, disallowance of repairs

BREACH CANDY MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTRE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Breach Candy Medical Ito(Exemption)-1(1) Research Centre Room No. 508, 5Th 60-A, Bhulabhai Desai Road Vs. Floor, Pirmal Mumbai-400 026. Chamber, Parel Mumbai-400 012. Pan : Aaatb0045Q Appellant Respondent

section 12A of the Act and hence the Ld. AO went on a wrong presumption and applied the provisions of Trust to it and disallowed the depreciation

FAYZ E HUSAYNI TRUST,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NAFC) DELHI , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

section 12A of the Act and also it is\nregistered with Charity Commissioner, Mumbai. The assessee is\nengaged in the charitable activities. The main object of the trust is to\narrange and provide assistance and facilities to pilgrims visiting holy\nplaces such as Mecca and Madina etc., the other objects includes\nproviding housing, medical and educational facilities and general charity

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OSD IN SITU CIRCLE 131 , MUMBAI vs. TATA CAPITAL HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

12A of the Act\nagainst the certificate issued under section 80G(5) of the Act. The AO denied\nthe claim on the Jamnagar Utilities and Power Pvt. Ltd ground that the\ndonation made is not voluntary but is under a statutory obligation. The\nCIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by placing reliance on the decision

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OSD IN SITU CIRCLE 131, MUMBAI vs. TATA CAPITAL HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

12A of the Act\nagainst the certificate issued under section 80G(5) of the Act. The AO denied\nthe claim on the Jamnagar Utilities and Power Pvt. Ltd ground that the\ndonation made is not voluntary but is under a statutory obligation. The\nCIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by placing reliance on the decision

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

depreciation in the case of charitable trusts for which the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Foundation (2018) 161 DTR (SC) 33 has held that the shall be prospective and not retrospective, following the same analogy the amended section 11(7) would also be prospective and not retrospective. We, therefore respectfully following the aforesaid