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

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

6 of 36 10A for registering itself as required under section 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act. We were informed by the communication dated 15th March 1976 that the said application has been entered at Serial No. TR/10925 in the Register of applications under section 12A(a) of the Act maintained by the Income Tax Department. We now refer

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

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

6 of 36 10A for registering itself as required under section 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act. We were informed by the communication dated 15th March 1976 that the said application has been entered at Serial No. TR/10925 in the Register of applications under section 12A(a) of the Act maintained by the Income Tax Department. We now refer

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

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

6. Income Tax concerned indicating that the assessee does not “desire to continue to avail the benefits of the registration made by the trustees in 1975”. This communication reads as follows: March 11, 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai 400 012 Dear Sir, Navajibai Ratan Tata Trust is a public charitable trust created by the trust

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

6 of 35 has been entered at Serial No. TR/10925 in the Register of applications under section 12A(a) of the Act maintained by the Income Tax Department. We now refer to Section 12AA(4) of the Act, inserted with effect from 1st October 2014, by the Finance Act (No. 2) Act, 2014, and submit that some of the activities

R D TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 17, MUMBAI

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

6 of 36 Dear Sir, Navajibai Ratan Tata Trust is a public charitable trust created by the trust deed dated 23rd December 1974. The trust, on 1st August 1975, had filed the prescribed form no. 10A for registering itself as required under section 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act. We were informed by the communication dated 15th March

ASIA SOCIETY INDIA CENTRE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION)-1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

11(3) of the Act had come up for consideration before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in a writ petition challenging the initiation of re-assessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. While quashing the reassessment 6

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Section 41D of The MPT Act. However the doctrine of proportionality is a principle in law, which gives direction to a thought of a judge while imposing penalty. It is based on the idea of justice and objectivity. The penalty imposed on a person should be commensurate with the wrong done by him. Therefore, it is always a matter

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Section 41D of The MPT Act. However the doctrine of proportionality is a principle in law, which gives direction to a thought of a judge while imposing penalty. It is based on the idea of justice and objectivity. The penalty imposed on a person should be commensurate with the wrong done by him. Therefore, it is always a matter

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Section 41D of The MPT Act. However the doctrine of proportionality is a principle in law, which gives direction to a thought of a judge while imposing penalty. It is based on the idea of justice and objectivity. The penalty imposed on a person should be commensurate with the wrong done by him. Therefore, it is always a matter

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Section 41D of The MPT Act. However the doctrine of proportionality is a principle in law, which gives direction to a thought of a judge while imposing penalty. It is based on the idea of justice and objectivity. The penalty imposed on a person should be commensurate with the wrong done by him. Therefore, it is always a matter

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

Bench: Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

6) The liability of a legal representative under this section shall, subject to the provisions of sub provisions of sub-section (4) and sub-section (5), be limited to the extent to section (5), be limited to the extent to which the estate is capable of meeting the liability. which the estate is capable of meeting the liability

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

6)/(7). The impugned year that is AY 2009-10 is also prior to the aforesaid amendment brought into section 11 and therefore, is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jasubhai Foundation (supra). 6.2. Assessee thus, made out a case that the reassessment

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

6)/(7). The impugned year that is AY 2009-10 is also prior to the aforesaid amendment brought into section 11 and therefore, is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jasubhai Foundation (supra). 6.2. Assessee thus, made out a case that the reassessment

ASSITANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAUTILYA BHAVAN BANDRA MUMBAI vs. TATA EDUCATION TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

6)/(7). The impugned year that is AY 2009-10 is also prior to the aforesaid amendment brought into section 11 and therefore, is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jasubhai Foundation (supra). 6.2. Assessee thus, made out a case that the reassessment

THE BHATIA GENERAL HOSPITAL,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhri

reassessment order passed was illegal and bad in law on account of the fact that: It was not based on any new tangible material, but on the basis of material already available on record It was due to a mere change of opinion on the same set of facts considered in the original assessment proceedings It amounted to review

THE BHATIA GENERAL HOSPITAL,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhri

reassessment order passed was illegal and bad in law on account of the fact that: It was not based on any new tangible material, but on the basis of material already available on record It was due to a mere change of opinion on the same set of facts considered in the original assessment proceedings It amounted to review

HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT-6, MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed

11 Assessment Years: 2011-12 substantive part of section 147 empowers the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and any other income which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of proceedings under the section. The effect of Explanation 3 is to empower the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

6\ngrounds of appeal which are taken up hereinafter in seriatim.\nGround No.1 & 2\n26. Ground No. 1 & 2 raised by the Assessee challenged the validity\nof the reassessment proceedings read as under:\n“1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by\ntreating the reassessment order passed under section\n143(3) read with section