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

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

charitable activity of the trust. When the receipts of the hospital for the year was Rs.2,10,951/- then purchasing the vehicle worth Rs.89.00 lakh and incurring fuel expenses at Rs.2,46,096/- is nothing but mis-utilization of the trust funds/income for the benefit of the interested persons, i.e. Mr. Vikram Chavan, Managing Trustee and Ms. Pratima Chavan, Trustee

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

46,662/- an amount of Rs.2,15,38,004/- was spent on charitable activities, which accounted for 93.05% of the income, and thus, there should be no tax liability in the given year. After examining the submissions, it is observed that the return for the relevant assessment year was filed beyond the due date prescribed under section

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

46,662/- an amount of Rs.2,15,38,004/- was spent on charitable activities, which accounted for 93.05% of the income, and thus, there should be no tax liability in the given year. After examining the submissions, it is observed that the return for the relevant assessment year was filed beyond the due date prescribed under section

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

46,662/- an amount of Rs.2,15,38,004/- was spent on charitable activities, which accounted for 93.05% of the income, and thus, there should be no tax liability in the given year. After examining the submissions, it is observed that the return for the relevant assessment year was filed beyond the due date prescribed under section

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

46,662/- an amount of Rs.2,15,38,004/- was spent on charitable activities, which accounted for 93.05% of the income, and thus, there should be no tax liability in the given year. After examining the submissions, it is observed that the return for the relevant assessment year was filed beyond the due date prescribed under section

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

46,662/- an amount of Rs.2,15,38,004/- was spent on charitable activities, which accounted for 93.05% of the income, and thus, there should be no tax liability in the given year. After examining the submissions, it is observed that the return for the relevant assessment year was filed beyond the due date prescribed under section

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"

charitable trust. Assessee trust is also engaged in the activity of running restaurant, bar, card club, venue hall and sport activity. Assessee claimed that all these activities are covered u/s.2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1962. Assessee claimed that the main object of the assessee relates to promotion of sports. Assessee filed the return of income declaring ‘Nil’. During

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

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

section (3) of section 143 for any\nprevious year; or\nc) Such case has been selected in accordance with the risk\nmanagement strategy, formulated by the Board from time to\ntime, for any previous year;\nThe Principal Commissioner or Commissioner shall—\ni.\ncall for such documents or information from the trust\nor institution, or make such inquiry as he thinks

INCOME TAX OFFICERV(EXEMPTION) WARD 2, PUNE vs. CREDIA METRO PUNE, PUNE

trust, apart from business topics, various awareness, lectures are given to the people attending this exhibition like city development, pollution A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 Credai Pune Metro control, investment proposition and legal assistance to prospective buyers etc. These facts were not refuted by the Department. 10. Further, on identical facts, in the decision of the Delhi Bench

INCOME TAX OFFICERV(EXEMPTION) WARD 2, PUNE vs. CREDIA PUNE METRO , PUNE

trust, apart from business topics, various awareness, lectures are given to the people attending this exhibition like city development, pollution A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 Credai Pune Metro control, investment proposition and legal assistance to prospective buyers etc. These facts were not refuted by the Department. 10. Further, on identical facts, in the decision of the Delhi Bench

CREDAI-PUNE METRO,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, PUNE

trust, apart from business topics, various awareness, lectures are given to the people attending this exhibition like city development, pollution A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 Credai Pune Metro control, investment proposition and legal assistance to prospective buyers etc. These facts were not refuted by the Department. 10. Further, on identical facts, in the decision of the Delhi Bench

CREDAI - PUNE METRO,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE

trust, apart from business topics, various awareness, lectures are given to the people attending this exhibition like city development, pollution A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 Credai Pune Metro control, investment proposition and legal assistance to prospective buyers etc. These facts were not refuted by the Department. 10. Further, on identical facts, in the decision of the Delhi Bench

PIMPRI CHINCHWAD NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

trust. The Assessing Officer had re-worked the WDV of assets by allowing depreciation for one year. However, in view of Explanation 6 to section 43(6) of the Act, we find no merit in the issue raised by Revenue in this regard. We have already held in the paras hereinabove that the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation