MR HOMI R. COOPER,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, 19(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2016-

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Charitable Trust and also paid the necessary taxes thereon along with interest, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act accepting the return filed by the assessee in response to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. 5. Meanwhile, penalty proceedings vide notice dated 17.02.2021 u/s 274 r/w section 271

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. MUNIWAR ABAD CHARITABLE TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanito, Vs. Muniwar Abad Charitable 618, Mtnl Cumballa Hill Telephone Trust, Exchange Building, Peddar Road, 405A, 407, Jolly Bhavan No. 1, Maharashtra – 400 026 10, New Marine Lines, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020 Pan: Aaatm0140K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Charitable Trust 10. In the case of assessee it is not mere difference in the interpretation of law but the material facts born out of the records shows that the assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Hence, it is a fit case for levy of penalty u/s. 271

CREDIT GUARANTEE FUND TRUST FOR MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT EXEMPTION-1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarcredit Guarantee Fund Vs. Dcit(E) – 1(1) Trust Mumbai. 1St Floor, Sidbi Swavalaman Bhavan, Avenue – 3, Lane 2, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra (E) Pan/Gir No. Aaatc2613D (Applicant) (Respondent)

charitable object qualifying for exemption under section 11 of the Act. This decision is squarely covers the present case. In the instant case too, the assessee trust has been providing guarantees as per the Trust Deed settled by Government of India and SIDBI. It is also not a case where the assessee has been charging exorbitant processing and service charges

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

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust engaged in running various educational institutions. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee did not file any return of income since AY 2012-13. A survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted

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

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust engaged in running various educational institutions. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee did not file any return of income since AY 2012-13. A survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted

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

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust engaged in running various educational institutions. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee did not file any return of income since AY 2012-13. A survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted

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

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust engaged in running various educational institutions. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee did not file any return of income since AY 2012-13. A survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted

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

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income\ntax Act.\n\n3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust engaged in\nrunning various educational institutions. The Assessing Officer found\nthat the assessee did not file any return of income since AY 2012-13. A\nsurvey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted

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

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income\ntax Act.\n\n3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust engaged in\nrunning various educational institutions. The Assessing Officer found\nthat the assessee did not file any return of income since AY 2012-13. A\nsurvey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted

KALLIANJI CHATURBHUJ AND VIJAY CANTOL CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E)-1(4), MUMBAI

Trust. 3. Your appellant prays that the levy of penalty u/s 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act on your appellant for furnishing inaccurate particulars be deleted” 2. Briefly stated facts necessary for consideration and adjudication of the issues at hand are : the assessee being a charitable

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Charitable Trust, no tax is\npayable in view of the provisions of Section 11 and the error\ncommitted does not have any impact on the revenue In other\nwords, there is no revenue loss.\n(iii)\nAs stated earlier, the error / mistake is bonafide and\nunintentional and the same has been rectified even before the\nassessment order was passed

LATA PRAKASH MARADIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 42(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Lata Prakash Maradia Ito Ward – 42(1)(2) Flat No. 105, 1St Floor, Building N.2A, Kautilya Bhavan, Rna N.G Sunity Phase I Chs Ltd, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Thakur Village, Kandivali (E), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400101. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Apppm 9292 J Appellant Respondent

u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee filed a return submission dated 26.1 assessee filed a return submission dated 26.10.2021. 0.2021. Thereafter, Lata Prakash Maradia 4 the matter of levying penalty was assigned to the the matter of levying penalty was assigned to the Faceless P Faceless Penalty unit and accordingly unit

THE M K TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

penalty proceeding may be initiated u/s 271(1)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 of Rs. 10,000/- for non-compliance of notice u/s 142(1) of the IT Act, as mentioned above.” 8. We further noticed that during the course of proceeding u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act in response to notice u/s 142(1) the assessee

THE M K TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

penalty proceeding may be initiated u/s 271(1)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 of Rs. 10,000/- for non-compliance of notice u/s 142(1) of the IT Act, as mentioned above.” 8. We further noticed that during the course of proceeding u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act in response to notice u/s 142(1) the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS WARD 1 4, MUMBAI vs. J N TATA ENDOWMENT FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION OF INDIANS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed”

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Smt. Renu Jauhriito(Exemptions) Ward -14, Jn Tata Endowment Vs. Room No. 612, 6Th Floor, For The Higher Mtnl Telephone Exchange Education Of Indians, Buillding, Peddar Road, 2Nd Floor, Bombay Mumbai -400026. House, 24 Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Pan/Gir No. Aaatc0085C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

trust for charitable purpose outside India is not exempted u/s 11 and same will be treated as its income for the year under consideration and is being taxed accordingly. Penalty proceeding u/s 271

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

u/s 271(1)(c) on the basis of notice us 274 r.ws 271(1)(c) wherein no specific charge of either tiling of inaccurate particulars or concealment of income was mentioned and thereby passing the order of penalty which is to be quashed as per recent judgement of Bombay High Court and Supreme Court. 2. The assessee is a charitable

SHRI DILIP J. THAKKAR ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on merits

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Charitable Trust. Moreover, Trust has no income and hence not taxable. Ans This trust was formed by the Mrs. Kantaben C Suchak while she was on a short visit to India and they had house in Bangalore, the address of which is provided al the 1st page of the said deed. It was formed with an initial corpus

INFRASRUCTURE SERVICES ,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER 33(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Penalty\nproceedings u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in spite of\nfurnishing complete and accurate particulars and not concealing any\nincome in whatsoever manner.\nWe beg to pray before your honour to kindly consider our humble\nsubmission and decide the matter considering the merit in the case as\nsubmitted as above.\nYour Appellant craves leave