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

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). It was one of the 13 major ports operating in India. The entire income of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) was exempt under the provisions of section 10(20) of the Act upto and including the assessment year 2002-03. For the purpose of section

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

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). It was one of the 13 major ports operating in India. The entire income of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) was exempt under the provisions of section 10(20) of the Act upto and including the assessment year 2002-03. For the purpose of section

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

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). It was one of the 13 major ports operating in India. The entire income of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) was exempt under the provisions of section 10(20) of the Act upto and including the assessment year 2002-03. For the purpose of section

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

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). It was one of the 13 major ports operating in India. The entire income of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) was exempt under the provisions of section 10(20) of the Act upto and including the assessment year 2002-03. For the purpose of section

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

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). It was one of the 13 major ports operating in India. The entire income of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) was exempt under the provisions of section 10(20) of the Act upto and including the assessment year 2002-03. For the purpose of section

GURU KRIPA SEVA ASHYRAM,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD 1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

12A of Income tax Act, 1961 (hereafter 'Act’) where the total income of a trust or institution as computed under the Act without giving effect to the provisions of section 11 and section 12 exceeds the maximum amount which is net chargeable to income tax in any previous year, the accounts of the trust or institution for that year have

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, PUNE, PUNE

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

2) and 142(1) along\nwith questionnaire were issued by the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO\") calling\nfor the requisite details in response to which the assessee filed its reply/\nwritten submission(s) from time to time.\n3.1 During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO noticed\nthat the assessee in its return for the relevant

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:

12A and engaged in providing medical help, education help and relief to poor had let out its halls and buildings for earning rental income so as to fund its charitable objects, proviso to section 2(15) would not be attracted and the assessee could not be denied exemption under section 11. The relevant observations of the Tribunal read as under

OSWAL BANDHU SAMAJ,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTIONS) -1,, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.837/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Oswal Bandhu Samaj, C/O. Shah Khandelwal Jain & Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, Near Rto, Pune – 411 001 ......अपीलाथी / Appellant Pan : Aaato0138K

12A of the Act. I find that the Ld. CIT(A)-10, Pune in the said appellate order in the A.Y. 2010-11 has detailed facts in the case of the appellant thereby very well clarifying as to why the rental income received by the appellant from the properties and under what circumstances the same should not be treated other

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, PUNE, PUNE vs. ZEAL EDUCATION SOCIETY, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

12A of the Act and therefore claiming its income as exempt under the provisions of section 11(1) of the Act. For the A.Y. 2017-18, the assessee filed its return of income on 06/11/2017 declaring total income of Rs. NIL. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS. During the course of assessment proceedings

ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS,,SOLAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTION),, PUNE

In the result, this appeal of the appellant is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Hon’Ble Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.466/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : N.A. Association Of Consulting Civil The Commissioner Of Income Engineers, Vs Tax, Exemption, Pune. Sthapathya Bhavan, Damani Complex, Datta Chowk, Solapur – 413 007. Pan: Aacaa 6603 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Appellant prays to grant the same. 2. Appellant prays to add, alter, amend, take additional ground/s and /or withdraw the ground/s, during appeal proceedings. Appellant prays to allow the same.” 2. Brief facts of the case, are that the Appellant had applied for registration u/s 12AA of the Income

ADHAR PROJECT WELFARE SOCIETY,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

12A Sub-section (2) and the provisions of Section 11 ad 12 would apply accordingly. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Id CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the expenses incurred for charitable purpose without appreciating that the registration under section 12AB of the income Tax act has been obtained

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE ,, PUNE vs. SHIVNAGAR VIDYA PRASARAK MANDAL,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Section 11,12, 12A, 12AA & 13 and these provisions are independent code in itself in Chapter III of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and claim of depreciation u/s 32 comes under Chapter IV of the Act under the head ‘D’ - Profit and Gains of Business or Profession and depreciation is allowed when capital assets are used for the purpose

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE ,, PUNE vs. THE BISHOPS EDUCATION SOCIETY,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Section 11,12, 12A, 12AA & 13 and these provisions are independent code in itself in Chapter III of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and claim of depreciation u/s 32 comes under Chapter IV of the Act under the head ‘D’ - Profit and Gains of Business or Profession and depreciation is allowed when capital assets are used for the purpose

SHREE MAHAVEER RESEARCH FOUDATION,PUNE vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION) (HQ), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.792/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shree Mahaveer Research V The Dcit(Exemption) Foundation, S (Hq), Pune. 1183/ C/O.Vijayraj Ranka, G C Jewellers, Raviwar Peth, Pune – 411002. Maharashtra. Pan: Aadts7800B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.Cit(Dr) – Virtual Hearing. Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/05/2025

section 12A on the basis ofits registration in the year 1987. 10. In that view of the matter, the Assessing Officer was justified in granting the benefit of exemption undersection 12A for the assessment year 2010-2011. What was required to be considered was the relevantprovision prevailing in the year 1987, namely, the day on which the assessee applied

ASHWINI SAHAKARI RUNGNALAYA & RESEARCH CENTER,,SOLAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS),, PUNE

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 714/Pun/2018 Ashwini Sahakari Rugnalaya & Research Centre 7107/1, Plot No. 180, North Sadar Bazar, Solapur-413003. Pan: Aaaja0041K . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(Exemption) erred in passing order u/s 12AA(3) of the Income tax Act. 1961 in connection with proceedings initiated on 23/05/2008 which are concluded by passing order on u/s 28/03/2018. Such order passed after time gap of almost 10 years

DATTAKALA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,PUNE vs. A.D.I.T, CPC, BANGALURU, BANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

section 12A(1)(b) of the Act was also filed on 18.02.2021 along with the return of income. Initially, the return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act vide intimation order dated 24.12.2021 by CPC at total income of Rs.26,70,63,238/- 3 ITA Nos. 2567 & 2459/PUN/2024, AY 2020-21 wherein the CPC disallowed the exemption claimed

DATTAKALA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,PUNE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT , I.TAX DEPT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

section 12A(1)(b) of the Act was also filed on 18.02.2021 along with the return of income. Initially, the return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act vide intimation order dated 24.12.2021 by CPC at total income of Rs.26,70,63,238/- 3 ITA Nos. 2567 & 2459/PUN/2024, AY 2020-21 wherein the CPC disallowed the exemption claimed

D.Y. PATIL EDUCATION SOCIETY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकरअपऩलसं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2016 निर्धारणवषा / Assessment Year: N.A. D.Y.Patil Education Society, V The Commissioner Of 2126, „E‟ Tarabai Park, S Income Tax(Central), Kolhapur – 416003. Pune. Pan: Aaatd8919M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta, Dharmesh Shah & S R Kabra – Cas Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 04/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 01/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax(Central), Pune Under Section 12Aa R.W.S 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 24.02.2016. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(Central) In Deciding The Issue Of Registration Of The Education Society Under 5. 12Aa Of The Act Vide His Order Dt. 24-02-2016 Erred In

2. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) for the Assessee filed paper book. Ld.AR submitted that only the concise grounds shall be considered. 3. At the outset of hearing, Ground No.2 and 3 were not pressed by the Assessee. 4. Ld.AR submitted that Ld.Pr.CIT, Central, Pune vide order dated 24.02.2016 passed u/s.12AA r.w.s 254 has exceeded the jurisdiction. Ld.AR submitted that while