JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

10. Calcutta High Court in Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal’s case (supra) while interpreting s. 12A(b) held that the provision was directory in nature and the AO could allow the assessee to file the audit report, at any time before the completion of the assessment. In this case the assessee, a charitable trust registered with the CIT filed its return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

10. Calcutta High Court in Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal’s case (supra) while interpreting s. 12A(b) held that the provision was directory in nature and the AO could allow the assessee to file the audit report, at any time before the completion of the assessment. In this case the assessee, a charitable trust registered with the CIT filed its return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

10. Calcutta High Court in Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal’s case (supra) while interpreting s. 12A(b) held that the provision was directory in nature and the AO could allow the assessee to file the audit report, at any time before the completion of the assessment. In this case the assessee, a charitable trust registered with the CIT filed its return

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

10. Calcutta High Court in Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal’s case (supra) while interpreting s. 12A(b) held that the provision was directory in nature and the AO could allow the assessee to file the audit report, at any time before the completion of the assessment. In this case the assessee, a charitable trust registered with the CIT filed its return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

10. Calcutta High Court in Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal’s case (supra) while interpreting s. 12A(b) held that the provision was directory in nature and the AO could allow the assessee to file the audit report, at any time before the completion of the assessment. In this case the assessee, a charitable trust registered with the CIT filed its return

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

10. Calcutta High Court in Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal’s case (supra) while interpreting s. 12A(b) held that the provision was directory in nature and the AO could allow the assessee to file the audit report, at any time before the completion of the assessment. In this case the assessee, a charitable trust registered with the CIT filed its return

SETH RAMDAS NATHUBHAI DHARMADAYA VISHWASTA NIDHI,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,(EXEMPTIONS) -1,, PUNE

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Seth Ramdas Nathubhai Dharmadaya Vs. Ito Vishwasta Nidhi, (Exemptions)-1, C/O. Shah Khandelwal Jain & Pune Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, Near Rto, Pune 411 001 Pan : Aaatr6805N Appellant Respondent

25 Seth Ramdas Nathubhai Dharmadaya Vishwasta Nidhi CIT(A) upheld the denial of exemption u/s.11 for violation of section 13(2)(c) r.w.s.13(1)(c) for the diversion of trust income for the benefit of persons covered u/s.13(3) of the Act as made by the AO. 16. Even before this Bench also, the ld. AR reiterated the submissions placed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, NEAR HOLY CROSS ENGLISH SCHOOL vs. THE NANDED SIKHGURUDWARA SACHKHAND HAZUR SAHIB, ABCHALNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 (Central Act XIV of 1920) and the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The respondent-assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 declaring Rs. Nil income after claiming exemption of income under the provisions of section 10(230)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) Against the said

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, NEAR HOLY CROSS ENGLISH SCHOOL vs. THE NANDED SIKHGURUDWARA SACHKHAND HAZUR SAHIB, APCHALNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 (Central Act XIV of 1920) and the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The respondent-assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 declaring Rs. Nil income after claiming exemption of income under the provisions of section 10(230)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) Against the said

AIDS SOCIETY OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE

section 12AB).\nChandigarh Education Society (Flag- 10) + Shridevi Charitable Trust(Flag- 25) cases given in Case-Law compilation\nConclusion - As per various

SHRI ISHWARLAL GULABCHAND VARDHAMANTAP AYAMBIL TRUST,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 7(1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

charitable trust registered u/s.12A of the Act and is accumulating the funds as per the provisions of section 11(2) of the Act. Details for A.Y. 2017-18 to 2023-24 are as under : u/s.11(2) A.Y.2017-18

SHRI VASUPUJYA SWAMI MAHARAJ TEMPLE TRUST,PUNE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD 1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

charitable trust registered u/s.12A of the Act and is accumulating the funds as per the provisions of section 11(2) of the Act. Details for A.Y. 2017-18 to 2023-24 are as under : u/s.11(2) A.Y.2017-18

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. MUKUND BHAVAN TRUST,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act. 2 ITA No.374/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2012-13 4. Brief facts relating to the issue on hand are that the assessee is a public charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act vide order dated 25- 03-1975. The assessee derives income from Bank deposits and rent income. The assessee filed return of income

ASSISTANT OINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. PYC HINDU GYMKHANA,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri "याियक सद"य के सम" D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.179/Pun/2015 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

10,663/-. To some extent, there is ambiguity in the mind of the AO qua the conclusions on the claim of the assessee with reference to the capital expenditure. CIT(A) has dealt with this issue vide Ground No.8 of the assessee in Para No.6 and 6.1 of his order. The issue is understood as a case of non allowance

M.M. PATEL PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,SOLAPUR vs. PCIT- CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

25 of the Paper-Book. Perusal\nof the said notice reveals that, learned PCIT(Central) has used powers\nu/s 12AA on 20/4/2024.\nIt will be relevant to note wording of section 12AA(5) in this regard.\nThe said sub-section reads as under\n\"12AA(5) - Noting contained in this section shall apply on or\nafter

AGRA OBSTETRICAL AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,AGRA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PUNE

Section 12A of the\nAct and, if so, under which provision of the Act?\n18. Second, when the CIT grants registration certificate under Section\n12A of the Act to the assessee, whether grant of certificate is his quasi\njudicial function and, if so, its effect on exercise of his power of\ncancellation of such grant of registration certificate?\n19. Third

AUDYOGIK NIDHI VISHWAST SANSTHA POONA,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PMT BUILDING

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraaudyogik Nidhi Vishwast Sanstha The Cit (Exemption), Poona Pune 366, Narayan Peth, Limaye Vs. Building, Laxmi Road, Pune – 411030 Pan: Aaata1619H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05-02-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-04-2025 O R D E R

section 12AA. 24. Since in the instant case the objects of the assessee trust have not been held to be non-charitable in nature and since a perusal of the Balance Sheet of the assessee trust shows that the assessee is not carrying out any commercial activity and since due to insufficient funds available at its disposal, the assessee

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INTERLOCKING SURGEONS,SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

charitable trust, is a public body and, accordingly, there is no question of its beneficiaries being individual members, whose shares have therefore to be defined. He failed to appreciate the facts, the law involved as well as the CBDT's Circular No.320 dated 11/01/1982 that is binding on the department. 2. The learned CIT (A) erred on facts