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

charitable purpose nor exercised the option in writing for the accumulation of income as per the provisions of Section 11(2) of the Act. Further, the said finding and computation by the Assessing Officer has neither been challenged before the CIT(A) nor has been challenged before the Tribunal by the ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 assessee at any point

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

charitable purpose nor exercised the option in writing for the accumulation of income as per the provisions of Section 11(2) of the Act. Further, the said finding and computation by the Assessing Officer has neither been challenged before the CIT(A) nor has been challenged before the Tribunal by the ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 assessee at any point

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

charitable purpose nor exercised the option in writing for the accumulation of income as per the provisions of Section 11(2) of the Act. Further, the said finding and computation by the Assessing Officer has neither been challenged before the CIT(A) nor has been challenged before the Tribunal by the ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 assessee at any point

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

charitable purpose nor exercised the option in writing for the accumulation of income as per the provisions of Section 11(2) of the Act. Further, the said finding and computation by the Assessing Officer has neither been challenged before the CIT(A) nor has been challenged before the Tribunal by the ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 assessee at any point

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

charitable purpose nor exercised the option in writing for the accumulation of income as per the provisions of Section 11(2) of the Act. Further, the said finding and computation by the Assessing Officer has neither been challenged before the CIT(A) nor has been challenged before the Tribunal by the ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 assessee at any point

SHRI SWAMI SAMARTH ADHYATMIK SANSHODHAN SANSTHA,AURANGABAD vs. CIT(E), PUNE

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

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

section 80G, charitable purpose excludes any purpose whole or substantially the whole of which is of a religious nature. It is the submission of the Ld. AR that the Ld. CIT(E) has picked up only 3-4 activities viz. Datta Jayanti, Guru Purnima Utsav, Datta Yaag, Shri Swami Samarth Prakat Din etc. and 3-4 objects such

DHARMBHASKAR RASHTRASANT SHRIPACHLEGAVKAR MAHARJ PRATISHTAN,PUNE vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

58,884/- vide his order dated\n29.06.2016 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the\n\"Act\"). Similarly, for AY 2012-13, the Ld. AO completed the assessment\nvide order dated 30.06.2016 treating the trust as AOP taking surplus of\nRs.2,93,770/- as taxable income and raised demand of Rs.1,37,083/-. The\nassessee challenged

DHARMBHASKAR RASHTRASANT SHRIPACHLEGAVKAR MAHARJ PRATISHTAN,PUNE vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

58,884/- vide his order dated\n29.06.2016 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the\n\"Act\"). Similarly, for AY 2012-13, the Ld. AO completed the assessment\nvide order dated 30.06.2016 treating the trust as AOP taking surplus of\nRs.2,93,770/- as taxable income and raised demand of Rs.1,37,083/-. The\nassessee challenged

SHRI GANADHIPATI GANDHARACHARYA KUNTIUSAGAR VIDYA SODH SONSTHA,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, PUNE, KOLHAPUR

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 143(1) of the Act.” AYs 2018-19 to 2021-26 6. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 7. The Ld. AR submitted that both the Ld. AO as well as Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has erred in disallowing the assessee’s claim of exemption

SHRI GANADHIPATI GANDHARACHARYA KUNTIUSAGAR VIDYA SODH SONSTHA,PUNE vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 143(1) of the Act.” AYs 2018-19 to 2021-26 6. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 7. The Ld. AR submitted that both the Ld. AO as well as Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has erred in disallowing the assessee’s claim of exemption

SHRI GANADHIPATI GANDHARACHARYA KUNTIUSAGAR VIDYA SODH SONSTHA,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, PUNE, KOLHAPUR

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 143(1) of the Act.” AYs 2018-19 to 2021-26 6. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 7. The Ld. AR submitted that both the Ld. AO as well as Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has erred in disallowing the assessee’s claim of exemption

SHRI GANADHIPATI GANDHARACHARYA KUNTIUSAGAR VIDYA SODH SONSTHA,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, PUNE, KOLHAPUR

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 143(1) of the Act.” AYs 2018-19 to 2021-26 6. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 7. The Ld. AR submitted that both the Ld. AO as well as Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has erred in disallowing the assessee’s claim of exemption

KHARADI JAIN SAMAJ TRUST,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

58 days. The assessee sought condonation of delay explaining the reasons for delayed filing of appeal supported by sworn affidavit of Mr. Sharad Kumar Bajaj, trustee which was opposed by the Ld. DR. 3.1 We have gone through the contents of the application and deposition made by the trustee in his affidavit. We are of the view that there

BANSILAL RAMNATH AGARWAL CHARITABLE TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21 Bansilal Ramnath Agarwal Charitable Trust Cit (Exemption), 251, Budhwar Peth, City Post Chowk, Vs. Pune Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaatb4383K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-01-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, V.P:

charitable trust and its related concerns are excessive and lack commercial prudence, the trust forfeits exemption under Section 11. He further noted that in the case of M/s Agrabh also 100% of the revenue is received from the assessee only. Since the Assessing Officer in the instant case has passed the order without scrutinizing the commercial viability, necessity and reasonableness

MARWADI NAVYUVAK VACHANALAYA ,LATUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Pandamarwadi Navyuvak Vachanalaya Cit(Exemption), Pune Marwadi Navyuvak Vachanal, Vs. Main Road, Latur – 413512 Pan: Aabtm2714L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25-08-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-09-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

charitable in nature. 6. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax vs. Shri Vile Parle Kelavani Mandal (2015) 58 taxmann.com 288 (Bom), the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that where assessee trust generated income by giving

SHAHU SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, LATUR,LATUR vs. ACIT (EXMP.) CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

charitable trust exclusively engaged in imparting\nof recognized educational courses. Moreover, the institution is\nsubstantially financed by the Government, therefore, whole of the\nincome of the trust is exempted u/s. 10(23C) (iiiab) of the Act.\nTherefore, the assessee trust was required to submit its return in ITR-\n7. Whereas, by mistake, ITR 5 is submitted.\nYour honour, in order

ROYAL SWAN CHARITABLE MINORITY TRUST,NANDED vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NANDED

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all the three AYs 2012-13,

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

charitable institution u/s 133A of the Act and thus material impounded or gathered cannot be used or form the basis of any A.Ys. 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 proceedings nor does the statement on oath during the survey have any legal sanctity or legal basis. (ii) the reference to the DVO was contrary to the provisions of law provided

ROYAL SWAN CHARITABLE MINORITY TRUST,NANDED vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NANDED

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all the three AYs 2012-13,

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

charitable institution u/s 133A of the Act and thus material impounded or gathered cannot be used or form the basis of any A.Ys. 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 proceedings nor does the statement on oath during the survey have any legal sanctity or legal basis. (ii) the reference to the DVO was contrary to the provisions of law provided