Section 2(29C) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 2(29C) is CIT v. K. Srinivasan (83 ITR 346), cited in 129 of the 72 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 2(29C)

CIT v. K. Srinivasan
83 ITR 346 · 1972 · Supreme Court
129
citing judgments

The term 'tax' includes surcharge and cess. Surcharge and additional surcharge are considered components of income tax, which can be levied as a basic charge, surcharge, special surcharge, and additional surcharge.

CIT v. Sae Head Office Monthly Paid Employees Welfare Trust
271 ITR 159 · 2004 · High Court
30
citing judgments

Beneficiaries of a trust do not set up the trust, and trustees derive authority from the trust deed, meaning neither trustees nor beneficiaries form an association for a common purpose solely due to their existence.

CIT v. Shree Krishna Bandar Trust
247 ITR 1 · 2001 · High Court
23
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer can rectify a mistake apparent from the record under Section 154 if the assessee is erroneously taxed at individual rates when it should have been taxed as an AOP.

Araadhya Jain Trust v. ITO
173 Taxmann.com 343 · 2025 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

The definition of maximum marginal rate under section 2(29C) can be interpreted to determine the applicable surcharge rates, particularly for income including dividends, as per the First Schedule to the Finance Act. This affects how surcharge is calculated on taxable income.

ITO v. Tayal Sales Corporation
1 SOT 579 · 2003 · ITAT
18
citing judgments

The maximum marginal rate (MMR) of income tax is applied, and surcharge is levied separately if applicable. Surcharge is not leviable if the quantum of income is below a certain threshold.

CIT v. CV Divakaran Family Trust
122 Taxmann 405 · 2002 · High Court
9
citing judgments
CIT v. C.V. Divakaran Family Trust
254 ITR 222 · 2002 · High Court
7
citing judgments
Piarelal Sakseria Family Trust v. CIT
136 ITR 583 · 1982 · Reported
6
citing judgments
Surendranath Gangopadhyaya Trust v. CIT
142 ITR 149 · 1983 · Reported
5
citing judgments
Clestra Foundation v. ITO
169 Taxmann.com 46 · 2024 · Reported
5
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 2(29C)

Rajiv Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 160/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Ms. Padmavathy S

Section 111ASection 12ASection 143(1)Section 2Section 234CSection 254(1)

Anil Gala Navneet Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(1)(6), Mumbai

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

ITA 2951/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Praksh Kantanil Gala Navneet Trust Vs Income Tax Cpc, Bengaluru Navneet Bhavan, Bhavani Shankar Road, Nr. Shardashram Society, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400 028 Pan : Aada5826D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay ParikhFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe – (SR. DR.)
Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2Section 234Section 250

Bhagirathi Enterprise, Vile Parle West Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 34(1)(1), Bandra East Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the AY

ITA 3130/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Anant N. Pai, CAFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 167BSection 2

Bhagirathi Enterprise, Vile Parle West Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai Bandra East

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the AY

ITA 3129/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Anant N. Pai, CAFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 167BSection 2

Bhagirathi Enterprise, Vile Parle West Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 34(1)(1), Bandra East Mumbai

ITA 3128/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Anant N. Pai, CAFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 167BSection 2

Hreyansh Vasundhara Family Trust, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1793/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1793/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Hreyansh Vasundhara Family Trust, S. No. 1A, F-1, Irani Market Compound, Yerwada, Pune – 411006 Vs. Ito, Ward-7(1), Pune Pan : Aabth8220Q अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri C.H. Naniwadekar Department By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 18-06-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26-06-2025 आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.07.2024 Of The Ld. Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Vadodara [“Addl./Jcit(A)"] Pertaining To Assessment Year ("Ay") 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : "In The Fact & The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Addl/Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) -(A)2 Vadodara, Erred In Confirming The Variance In The Intimation U/S 143(1) Made By Cpc In Respect Of The Rate Of Surcharge & Erred: 1. In Not Adjudicating & Hence Confirming That The Ao Cpc Has Power To Vary The Rate Of Surcharge While Processing The Return U/S 143(1). 2. In Holding That In The Case Of The Appellant Provisions Of Section 167B Rws 2(29C) Are Applicable & Therefore The Appellant Is Subjected To Taxation At The Highest Slab Of Income Tax (Including Surcharge) As Applicable For The Given Ay Which Is 37% Surcharge In The Case Of The Appellant For The Given Ay.

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 167BSection 2

Anu Aga Family Discretionary Trust, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1258/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 2

Araadhya Jain Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 22(1)(6), Mumbai

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

ITA 4272/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Rohan DeshpandeFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(29)Section 250

Lotus Family Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax Exem. Ward 1(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 3608/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Sanjay ParikhFor Respondent: Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia (SR. DR.)
Section 111ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 234BSection 250

Lotus Family Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax Exem.Ward 1(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 3607/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Sanjay ParikhFor Respondent: Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia (SR. DR.)
Section 111ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 234BSection 250

Hreyansh Vasundhara Family Trust, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1795/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2025AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Kiran SanmaneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 111ASection 112Section 112ASection 143(1)Section 167Section 167BSection 2(290)Section 234C

Hreyansh Vasundhara Family Trust, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1794/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2025AY 2022-23

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

For Appellant: Shri Kiran SanmaneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 111ASection 112Section 112ASection 143(1)Section 167Section 167BSection 2(290)Section 234C

Gj Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 26(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6427/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S

Section 112Section 143(1)Section 154Section 164(1)Section 2Section 250

Ashok Patni Family Trust, Pune vs. The Asst./Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2782/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kiran SanmaneFor Respondent: Mrs. Indira Adakil
Section 143(1)Section 164Section 167BSection 2Section 3

Sow Rachna Rathi Family Trust, Pune vs. Dy Director of Income Tax CPC, Benguluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2713/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2713/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B Budruk
Section 143(1)Section 2Section 250Section 3

Aryaman Family Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 4038/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Aryaman Family Trust Dcit, Cpc 226, 2Nd Floor Bajaj Bhavan Post Bag No. 2 Jamnalal Bajaj Marg Vs. Electricity Post Nariman Point Office, Karnataka Mumbai-400 021. 560 500 Pan : Aahta3528J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri M.A. GohelFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia
Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2

Nik Family Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Circle 23(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 403/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainnik Family Trust Vs. Dcit, Circle – 23(1) C-7, Ishwar Niwas Sick Piramal Chamber. Nagar, Vp Raod, Girgaon. Pan/Gir No. Aadtn2244C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Dharan Gandhi A/W Shri Ashutosh Patare Revenue By Shri Avinash Karpe, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 24.12.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Only Effective Issue Raised In The Present Appeal Regarding Levying Of Surcharge. In This Regard It Is Submitted That Assessee Is A Discretionary Trust, Eligible To File Return In Itr-5, The Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of 2 Nik Family Trust, Mumbai

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2Section 2(1)Section 250

Kellogg Alumni Club, Delhi vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 721/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2023-24 Kellogg Alumni Club, Vs. Dy. Director Of Income G-1, F/F, 10 Central Av., Tax Cpc, Maharani Bagh, Bangaluru New Delhi – 110 065 Karnataka (Pan: Aactk1018J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2025 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Emanating From The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi In Appeal No. Itba/Apls/250/2024-25/1071064606(1) Order Dated 10.12.2024. 2. Briefly Stated, Facts Are That Asssessee Filed Return Of Income On 30.07.2023, Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 6,71,350/-. Ao Accepted The Said Income & Determined The Tax At Rs. 2,01,405/-. As Per The Assessee, No Surcharge On The Same Was Chargeable Under The Act. However, The Cpc Charged Surcharge At 37% On The Tax Payable. Ao Has Given Consequential Effect On Health & Education Cess, Interest U/S. 234B & S. 234C Of The Act. In View Of The Intimation, The Assessee Is An Aop & Therefore, The Tax Is Chargeable At Maximum Marginal Rate Which Also Includes Surcharge At Maximum Marginal Rate. According To The Assessee, It Being

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 234BSection 234C

Shri Sorathiya Darji Kedvani Mandal, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 112/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Pratik P. Darji, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 167BSection 2

Sameer Benara Family Trust, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle 7, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 639/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.639/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24 Sameera Benara Family Trust, V The S.No.1A, F-1, Irani Market S Asst./Dy.Commissioner Compound, Yerawada, Pune – Of Income Tax, Circle-7, 411006. Maharashtra. Pune. Pan: Aapts3312J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 143(1)Section 167Section 2Section 250