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

iiiad) or sub-clause (via) or any hospital or other medical institution referred to in sub-clause (iiiae) or sub-clause (via) or any fund or institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or any trust or institution referred to in sub-clause (v) of clause (23C) of section 10, is exempt from income-tax subject to the fulfilment

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

iiiad) or sub-clause (via) or any hospital or other medical institution referred to in sub-clause (iiiae) or sub-clause (via) or any fund or institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or any trust or institution referred to in sub-clause (v) of clause (23C) of section 10, is exempt from income-tax subject to the fulfilment

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

iiiad) or sub-clause (via) or any hospital or other medical institution referred to in sub-clause (iiiae) or sub-clause (via) or any fund or institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or any trust or institution referred to in sub-clause (v) of clause (23C) of section 10, is exempt from income-tax subject to the fulfilment

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

iiiad) or sub-clause (via) or any hospital or other medical institution referred to in sub-clause (iiiae) or sub-clause (via) or any fund or institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or any trust or institution referred to in sub-clause (v) of clause (23C) of section 10, is exempt from income-tax subject to the fulfilment

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1 THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

iiiad) of the Income tax Act as the aggregate annual receipts of each educational institution of the appellant did not exceed INR 1 crore. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the interest levied by the assessing officer under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income tax Act. 8. The learned CIT(A) erred in not confirming

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) - THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

iiiad) of the Income tax Act as the aggregate annual receipts of each educational institution of the appellant did not exceed INR 1 crore. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the interest levied by the assessing officer under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income tax Act. 8. The learned CIT(A) erred in not confirming

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) - THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

iiiad) of the Income tax Act as the aggregate annual receipts of each educational institution of the appellant did not exceed INR 1 crore. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the interest levied by the assessing officer under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income tax Act. 8. The learned CIT(A) erred in not confirming

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

iiiad) of the Income tax Act as the aggregate annual receipts of each educational institution of the appellant did not exceed INR 1 crore. 7. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the interest levied by the assessing officer under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income tax Act. 8. The learned CIT(A) erred in not confirming

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) - THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\npartly allowed

iiiad) of the Income tax Act as the aggregate annual receipts of\neach educational institution of the appellant did not exceed INR 1 crore.\n7. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the interest levied by the assessing\nofficer under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income tax Act.\n8. The learned CIT(A) erred in not confirming

MUMBRA SHIKHSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) - THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\npartly allowed

iiiad) of the Income tax Act as the aggregate annual receipts of\neach educational institution of the appellant did not exceed INR 1 crore.\n7. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the interest levied by the assessing\nofficer under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income tax Act.\n8. The learned CIT(A) erred in not confirming

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the\nappeal of the Revenue is dismissed

iiiad) or sub-clause (vi) or any hospital or other institution referred to\nin sub-clause (iiiae) or sub-clause (via) or any fund or institution referred to\nin sub-clause (iv) or any trust or institution referred to in sub-clause (v) of\nclause (23-C) of section 10 or any trust or institution referred to in section

MADHAVI RAKSHA SANKALP,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) I(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2746/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Madhavi Raksha Sankalp The Dy. Director Of बनाम/ Nirmal Niketan, Income Tax (Exemption) – V. 2 Nd Floor, 1(1), Dr. Bhajekar Street, Income Tax Office, Mumbai – 400 004. Lalbaug, Piramal Chambers, Parel Mumbai-400012 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7188H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

disallowing the Appellant's claim of receipt of corpus donations of Rs.2,42,26,508/- 2. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in upholding the action of the AO of treating corpus donations Rs.2,42,26,508/- as anonymous donations, taxable u/s 115BBC

MADHVI RAKSHA SANKALP,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(E) WARD 2(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhan

23,720/- towards its corpus during the year. On a perusal of the details furnished by the assessee in the course of the assessment proceedings, it was observed by the A.O, that the bifurcated details of the corpus donations received by the assessee during the year were as under: Sr. No. Party Name Amount 1. Yogeshwar Krishi Rs.3

BANK OF INDIA RETIRED EMPLOYEES MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) - 1(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Bank Of India Retired Employees Ito(E)-1(1), Mumbai. Medical Assistance Trust, C-5, G बिधम/ Block Star House, Bandra Kurla Vs. Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabtb3373J (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

iiiad) or sub-clause (vi) or by any hospital or other institution referred to in sub-clause (iiiae) or sub-clause (via)] of clause (23C), of Sec. 10 or by an electoral trust. The A.O was of the view that every contribution received by a trust was to be taken as its income. Further, it was observed by him that