https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754079 ITAT Mumbai upheld CIT(A)'s decision allowing exemption under section 11 for a trust. The AO had disallowed salary payments to a specified person, reducing allowed amount from Rs. 8,93,468 to Rs. 4,80,000 based on comparison with other clerks. However, considering the employee's 17 years experience versus others, the excessive payment allegation was rejected. Similarly, rental payments were justified through government-approved valuer's market rental report of Rs. 14,80,024, while AO's ad hoc reduction to Rs. 60,000 monthly lacked basis. Since payments weren't excessive under section 13(3), provisions under sections 13(3)(c), 13(2)(c) and 13(2)(g) didn't apply. Assessee's appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 04 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Jun 2024 08:45:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754079 ITAT Mumbai upheld CIT(A)'s decision allowing exemption under section 11 for a trust. The AO had disallowed salary payments to a specified person, reducing allowed amount from Rs. 8,93,468 to Rs. 4,80,000 based on comparison with other clerks. However, considering the employee's 17 years experience versus others, the excessive payment allegation was rejected. Similarly, rental payments were justified through government-approved valuer's market rental report of Rs. 14,80,024, while AO's ad hoc reduction to Rs. 60,000 monthly lacked basis. Since payments weren't excessive under section 13(3), provisions under sections 13(3)(c), 13(2)(c) and 13(2)(g) didn't apply. Assessee's appeal allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 04 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754079