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

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

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

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

MAHARSHI KARVE STREE SHIKSHAN SAMSTHA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1409/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Maharshi Karve Stree Shikshan Samstha Karvenagar, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411052 …. Pan: Aaatm1969L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 11(1), Pune

58,789/- as per Income & Expenditure Account, to which sum of ₹ 11,00,15,480/- being the amount transferred to reserve was to be added and thereafter, benefit of accumulation of 15% to the extent of ₹ 9,69,63,129/- was to be allowed. The Assessing Officer also denied the exemption claimed by the assessee under section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MAHARSHI KARVE STREE SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1409/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Maharshi Karve Stree Shikshan Samstha Karvenagar, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411052 …. Pan: Aaatm1969L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 11(1), Pune

58,789/- as per Income & Expenditure Account, to which sum of ₹ 11,00,15,480/- being the amount transferred to reserve was to be added and thereafter, benefit of accumulation of 15% to the extent of ₹ 9,69,63,129/- was to be allowed. The Assessing Officer also denied the exemption claimed by the assessee under section

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,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

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

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

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

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. PIMPRI CHINCHWAD NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,, PUNE

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