TATA SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

2)(h) of the Income Tax Act, Assessment Year: 2019-20 Page 10 of 36 4. In view of the above, you are requested to show cause as to why the registration granted under section 12A of the Income Tax Act to you, as mentioned above, should not be cancelled. You may appear before the Pr CIT-17 Mumbai

SARVAJANIK SEVA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

2)(h) of the Income Tax Act, Assessment Year: 2019-20 Page 10 of 36 4. In view of the above, you are requested to show cause as to why the registration granted under section 12A of the Income Tax Act to you, as mentioned above, should not be cancelled. You may appear before the Pr CIT-17 Mumbai

NAVAJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Page 2 Of 47 1 A) The Impugned Order Dated 31.10.2019 Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax-17 ('Pcit') Under Section 12Aa(3)/(4) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('Ita') Cancelling The Registration Of The Appellant Is Without Jurisdiction And, Hence, Void Ab Initio.

2)(h) of the Income Tax Act, 4. In view of the above, you are requested to show cause as to why the registration granted under section 12A of the Income Tax Act to you, as mentioned above, should not be cancelled. You may appear before the Pr CIT- 17 Mumbai on 14.03.2018 at 11.30 AM either in person

JAMSETJI TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

2)(h) of the Income Tax Act, 4. In view of the above, you are requested to show cause as to why the registration granted under section 12A of the Income Tax Act to you, as mentioned above, should not be cancelled. You may appear before the Pr CIT-17 Mumbai on 14.03.2018 at 11.30 AM either in person

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

12A(1) of Act. g. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board v. ADIT(E)(121 taxmann.com 88) (Kar HC) (Pg. 200 of LPB) Para 7. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. Admittedly, the assessee is a statutory body, which is established and incorporated under section 5 of the KIAD

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

12A(1) of Act. g. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board v. ADIT(E)(121 taxmann.com 88) (Kar HC) (Pg. 200 of LPB) Para 7. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. Admittedly, the assessee is a statutory body, which is established and incorporated under section 5 of the KIAD

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

12A(1) of Act. g. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board v. ADIT(E)(121 taxmann.com 88) (Kar HC) (Pg. 200 of LPB) Para 7. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. Admittedly, the assessee is a statutory body, which is established and incorporated under section 5 of the KIAD

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

12A(1) of Act. g. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board v. ADIT(E)(121 taxmann.com 88) (Kar HC) (Pg. 200 of LPB) Para 7. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. Admittedly, the assessee is a statutory body, which is established and incorporated under section 5 of the KIAD

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

12A(1) of Act. g. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board v. ADIT(E)(121 taxmann.com 88) (Kar HC) (Pg. 200 of LPB) Para 7. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. Admittedly, the assessee is a statutory body, which is established and incorporated under section 5 of the KIAD

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

12A stand fulfilled. The effect of such a certificate of registration under section 12AA , therefore, cannot be ignored or wished away by the Assessing Officer by adopting a stand that the trust or institution is not fulfilling the conditions for applicability of sections 11 and 12." CO No 45/Mum/20 ITA No. 2883/Mum/19 Assessment year: 2015-16 Page

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

12A stand fulfilled. The effect of such a certificate of registration under section 12AA , therefore, cannot be ignored or wished away by the Assessing Officer by adopting a stand that the trust or institution is not fulfilling the conditions for applicability of sections 11 and 12." We find that the main objection of the departmental authorities was that

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

12A stand fulfilled. The effect of such a certi-ficate of registration under section 12AA , therefore, cannot be ignored or wished away by the Assessing Officer by adopting a stand that the trust or institution is not fulfilling the conditions for applicability of sections 11 and 12." CO No 43/Mum/20 ITA No. 2881/Mum/19 Assessment year: 2013-14 Page

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the Four appeals filed by the revenue and four cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

12A stand fulfilled. The effect of such a certificate of registration under section 12AA , therefore, cannot be ignored or wished away by the Assessing Officer by adopting a stand that the trust or institution is not fulfilling the conditions for applicability of sections 11 and 12." We find that the main objection of the departmental authorities was that

THE GEM & JEWELLERY EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (E) RG 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for 10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Gem & Jewellery Export Acit (Exemptions) Range- Promotion Council, 2(1), Vs. Tower-A, Aw-1010, G Block, 5Th Floor, Room No. 519, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, B.K.C., Bandra East, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaatt 3202 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Gem & Jewellery Export Dcit (Exemptions) Range- Promotion Council, 2(1), Tower-A, Aw-1010, G Block, Vs. 5Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Lalbaug, B.K.C., Bandra East, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaatt 3202 H Appellant Respondent

12A of the Act would not ipso facto ipso facto entitle the assessee for claim of exemption assessee for claim of exemption The Gem & Jewellery Exports Promotion Council The Gem & Jewellery Exports Promotion Council ITA No. 752/M/2017, 989/M/2019 & 2250/M/2019 AYs 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 AYs 2012 under section 11 of that unless conditions stipulated therein and under section

ASSOCIATION OF MUTUAL FUNDS IN INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(E)-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the present appeal is allowed

12A of the Act does not automatically entitled the Appellant to get exemption under Section 11 read with Section 2(15) of the Act, the operations/activities of the Appellant and the claim of exemption under Section 11 of the Act is to be examined and tested on year to year basis. The CIT(A) concluded that though in the present

DCIT- CC- 1(4), MUMBAI vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result appeals and Cross Objection of the assessee for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are partly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

section 80IA(12A) of the income Tax Act 1961. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appels) has erred in upholding the disallowance of additional depreciation

ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result appeals and Cross Objection of the assessee for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are partly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

section 80IA(12A) of the income Tax Act 1961. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appels) has erred in upholding the disallowance of additional depreciation

ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result appeals and Cross Objection of the assessee for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are partly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

section 80IA(12A) of the income Tax Act 1961. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appels) has erred in upholding the disallowance of additional depreciation