CIT v. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust

198 ITR 511High Court1992#2534 most cited

What is CIT v. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust authority for?

Filing an audit report, such as Form 10B under Section 12A(1)(b), is a directory procedural requirement for charitable trusts, not mandatory. If the report is not filed with the return, the Assessing Officer must provide an opportunity to rectify the defect before completing the assessment.

46

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust · 198 ITR 511 · section 12A(1)(b) · audit report filing · Form 10B · directory provision · mandatory vs directory · opportunity to rectify · defective return · charitable trust exemption

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 12Section 139Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 154Section 143(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 104section 80ac(ii)section 80p(2)(i)section 10basection 12a(1)(b)section 139(4a)section 80a(5)section 10bsection 288section 80p(1)section 80acsection 139(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD, KOLHAPUR , KOLHAPUR vs. THE NEW MIRAJ EDUCATION SOCIETY, MIRAJ, DIST. SANGLI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 928/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C.H. Naniwadekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Udaya Bhaskar Jakke, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

…h section 7 ITA.No.928/PUN/2025 (The New Miraj Education Society) 124(b), if the same was filed during the course of the assessment proceedings. The aforesaid principal is also upheld by courts in the following cases - CIT vs. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust (1992) 198 ITR 511 (Cal HC) CIT v. Shahzedanand Charity Trust, (1997) 228 ITR 292, 299 (Pun) HC) - CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Bishwesharlal Motilal Malwasie Trust (1992) 195 ITR 825 (Cal HC) Income Tax Officer vs. Sir Kikabhai Premchand Trust 42 SOT 403 (Mum ITAT) Swajan Pariwar Trust vs. ADIT(E) (1997) 57 TTJ 77 Commissioner of Income Tax II vs Mumbai Metropolitan Region…

SEVA BHARATHI TRUST,CHAMARAJANAGARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHAMARAJANAGARA

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

ITA 1486/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Seva Bharathi Trust, Vs. Ito, Sevabharathi College Campus, Ward –1, Chennipuradamole Road, Chamarajanagara. Chamarajanagara – 571 313. Pan : Aabts 6034 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Vageesh Hegde, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Vageesh Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 11Section 119Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139

…iterated the submissions made before the learned CIT(A) and submitted that filing of audit report within the due date as per the Act is not mandatory provision, it is directory in nature which is clear from the case of CIT vs. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust (1992) 198 ITR 511 (Cal) and he also relied on the judgment of ITAT Mumbai Bench in ITA No.5308/Mum/2009 and submitted that audit was completed by 20.08.2016 but due to mistake on the clerical staff of the CA, audit report in Form 10B could not be uploaded. As per section 12A(1)(b) of the Act, assessee is running an educational institutions and providing hospitalit…

SOCIETY FOR ADVANCEMENT OF VILLAGERS EMPOWERMENT AND REHABILITATION FOR ALL,KOLKATA vs. ITO (EXEMP) WARD-2(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2784/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandrasociety For Advancement Of Vs. Ito (Exem), Ward 2(2) Villagers Empowerment, Pratyakshkar Bhawan C/O, M/S Salarpuria Spm Civic Centre, Jajodia & Co., 7, C.R. New Delhi - 110002 Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal – 700 072 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacas3377F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Jhajharia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

…e material available on record and considered the judgment relied upon by the Ld. AR in the case of Swajan Pariwar Trust (supra) wherein the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust, reported in (1992) 198 ITR 511 (Cal) and the judgment in the matter of CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal Motilal Malwasie Trust, reported in (1992) 195 ITR 825 (Cal) were relied, wherein it has been held that if the audit report was not filed along with return of income the return became defective and the AO was required to give an opportunity to the assessee to submit the aud…

RAJPUT PANCHAYAT DHARMSHALA,HARIDWAR, UTTRAKHAND vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 189/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 12(1)(b)Section 12(1)(ba)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154

…Court in the case of Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries [1993] 201 ITR 325; wherein it has been held that the provision about furnishing of the auditor's report along with the nature. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Hardeodas Agarwala Trust (1992) 198 ITR 511 has held that whether a provision is directory or mandatory has to be considered in the context in which the conditions have been imposed therein along with the intent of legislature and upon the language in which that section is drafted. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case Shahzedanand Charity Trust – (1997) 228 ITR 292 has clari…

RAJPUT PANCHAYAT DHARMSHALA,HARIDWAR, UTTRAKHAND vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 186/DDN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 12(1)(b)Section 12(1)(ba)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154

…Court in the case of Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries [1993] 201 ITR 325; wherein it has been held that the provision about furnishing of the auditor's report along with the nature. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Hardeodas Agarwala Trust (1992) 198 ITR 511 has held that whether a provision is directory or mandatory has to be considered in the context in which the conditions have been imposed therein along with the intent of legislature and upon the language in which that section is drafted. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case Shahzedanand Charity Trust – (1997) 228 ITR 292 has clari…

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 41/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 234

…d from furnishing Form -10 during those\nassessment proceedings.\n• Also refer Raghavan Nair vs. ACIT 402 ITR 0400 (Ker) (2018)\nThe ratio of the above judgments are also applicable in the present case.\n6. 4. In the case of CIT v/s Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust 198 ITR 511(Cal) it has\nbeen held that It is now well-settled that a procedural provision, ordinarily, should\nnot be construed as mandatory, if the defect in the act done in pursuance of it\ncan be cured by permitting the appropriate rectification to be carried out at a\nsubsequent stage. Procedural laws are devised and enacted for the purpose of\nadvancin…

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 39/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 234

…d from furnishing Form -10 during those\nassessment proceedings.\n• Also refer Raghavan Nair vs. ACIT 402 ITR 0400 (Ker) (2018)\nThe ratio of the above judgments are also applicable in the present case.\n6. 4. In the case of CIT v/s Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust 198 ITR 511(Cal) it has\nbeen held that It is now well-settled that a procedural provision, ordinarily, should\nnot be construed as mandatory, if the defect in the act done in pursuance of it\ncan be cured by permitting the appropriate rectification to be carried out at a\nsubsequent stage. Procedural laws are devised and enacted for the purpose of\nadvancin…

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 569/NAG/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80P

…hat a return filed at any stage of such proceedings could be treated as non est in law and invalid for the purpose of deciding exemption under section 80P. Similar Position has been held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs Hardeodas Agarwall Trust [1992] 198 ITR 511 (Cal) where the court held that first and second appeal is a continuation of assessment proceedings. 7. That the Appellant would like to rely on the Judgement of Honorable Karnataka High Court Judgment in case of Guttigedarara Credit Co-Operative Society Limited v. Income Tax where the amount which was invested in banks to earn interest was not a…

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 568/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80P

…hat a return filed at any stage of such proceedings could be treated as non est in law and invalid for the purpose of deciding exemption under section 80P. Similar Position has been held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs Hardeodas Agarwall Trust [1992] 198 ITR 511 (Cal) where the court held that first and second appeal is a continuation of assessment proceedings. 7. That the Appellant would like to rely on the Judgement of Honorable Karnataka High Court Judgment in case of Guttigedarara Credit Co-Operative Society Limited v. Income Tax where the amount which was invested in banks to earn interest was not a…

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 567/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80P

…hat a return filed at any stage of such proceedings could be treated as non est in law and invalid for the purpose of deciding exemption under section 80P. Similar Position has been held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs Hardeodas Agarwall Trust [1992] 198 ITR 511 (Cal) where the court held that first and second appeal is a continuation of assessment proceedings. 7. That the Appellant would like to rely on the Judgement of Honorable Karnataka High Court Judgment in case of Guttigedarara Credit Co-Operative Society Limited v. Income Tax where the amount which was invested in banks to earn interest was not a…

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

ITA 566/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(1)

…hat a return filed at any stage of such proceedings could be treated as non est in law and invalid for the purpose of deciding exemption under section 80P. Similar Position has been held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs Hardeodas Agarwall Trust [1992] 198 ITR 511 (Cal) where the court held that first and second appeal is a continuation of assessment proceedings. 7. That the Appellant would like to rely on the Judgement of Honorable Karnataka High Court Judgment in case of Guttigedarara Credit Co-Operative Society Limited v. Income Tax where the amount which was invested in banks to earn interest was not a…

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. TATA MOTORS LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed except the issue relating to reopening, which is treated as academic

ITA 1977/MUM/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan Vora, Nikhil Tiwari & Mihir ChitaliaFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

…e by the Id. AO as per law prevailing at that time, the learned CIT(A) could not do by exercising enhancement powers. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hardeo Das Agarwala Trust reported in 198 ITR 511(CAL), wherein it was held as under.- 16. In our view, the result of ignoring such return or the audit report will be denial of exemption to the trust although the income 17 18 ITA No.1977 & CO 79/Mum/2023 (AY 2003-04) M/s.Tata Mortors Limited. has been spent for charitable or religious purposes. This was not intended by the legislators. If an as…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. P K KRISHNAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 3533/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm Income Tax Officer P K Krishnan Educational Trust 6Th Floor, Mtnl Building Shree Siddhi Vinayak Engl. Vs. Cumballa Hill, Pedder Road, High School, Hariyali Village Mumbai-400 026 Vikhroli (E), Mumbai-400 083 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatp5026F

For Appellant: Shri Mandar Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt, DR
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JM Income Tax Officer P K Krishnan Educational Trust 6th Floor, MTNL Building Shree Siddhi Vinayak Engl. Vs. Cumballa Hill, Pedder Road, High School, Hariyali village Mumbai-400 026 Vikhroli (E), Mumbai-400 083 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAATP5026F Assessee by : Shri Mandar Joshi, AR Revenue by : Shri H.M. Bhatt, DR Date of hearing: 23.04.2024 Date of pronouncement : 07.05.2024 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: ITA No. 3533/Mum/2023, for A.Y. 2021-22, is filed by the The 01. Income…

SHREE GOVERDHAN NATHJI HAVELI TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS-WARD-3 , BENGALURU

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

ITA 1088/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Shree Goverdhan The Income Tax Nathji Haveli Trust, Officer, No. 15, Nehrunagar, Exemptions, Seshadripuram, Ward – 3, Bangalore – 560 020. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aacts7617M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, Advocate
Section 11

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Shree Goverdhan The Income Tax Nathji Haveli Trust, Officer, No. 15, Nehrunagar, Exemptions, Seshadripuram, Ward – 3, Bangalore – 560 020. Bangalore. Vs. PAN: AACTS7617M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ravi Shankar, Advocate : Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate Revenue by Standing Counsel for Revenue Date of Hearing : 24-01-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 31-01-2024 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal arises out o…

S M K R VASHI HIGH SCHOOL,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 515/SRT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Dec 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.515/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Physical Court Hearing) S.M.K.R Vashi High School Income Tax Officer-Exemption Ward, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Umbhrat Road Maroli Bazar, Vs. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Jalalpore Navsari-396436 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfs 0980 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Chaitali Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Pophare, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

…) ITA No.515/SRT/2023 A.Y. 21-22 SMKR Vashi High School  Zenith Processing Mills vs. CIT [1996] 219 ITR 721 (Guj)  CIT vs. Gujarat Oil and Allied Industries (1993) 201 ITR 325 (Guj)  CIT vs. Web Commerce Pvt. LTd. 318 ITR 135 (Del)  CIT vs. Dr.L.M.Singhvi 289 ITR 425 (Raj)  Kokan Kala Shikshan Vikaas Sanstha vs. DCIT 645/Pun/2021 (Pune Trib.)  Society for Integrated Development in Urban and Rural Areas vs. DCIT 90 ITD 493 (Hyd. Trib.) 12. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the Revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the ld CIT(A), which we have already noted in our earlier para and is not being r…

ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. INDIAN SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 480/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)

…orders passed by the jurisdictional Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of (i) Commissioner of Income Tax vs Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal … reported in 195 ITR 825 dated 22.04.1991 and (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax vs Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust reported in 198 ITR 511 dated 14.06.1991] CBDT has issued Circular No. 2/2020 dated 03.01.2020 authorizing CIT to decide on the issue of condonation of 2 AY: 2018-19 Indian Sugar Mills Association delay in filing Form 10B and therefore order passed by the CIT(A), NFAC is in contravention to the provisions of the Act and in violation 3. For that the assessee craves leave…

M/S. MULKI SUNDAR RAM SHETTY NAGAR AYYAPPA SWAMY TEMPLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS, WARD-2, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 949/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Shreesh Kumar E. Hegde, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, D.R
Section 1Section 11(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234B

…. The assessee in this regard relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nagpur Hotel Owners’ Association (247 ITR 201) and the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust (1992) 198 ITR 511 (Cal.). The assessee further submitted that the CBDT M/s. Mulki Sundar Ram Shetty Nagar Ayyappa Swamy Temple Trust, Bangalore Page 4 of 7 has issued a Circular No.10 (F.No.197/55/2018) dated 22.5.2019, condoning the delay in filing the audit report provided the same is filed before the due date for filing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the A…

AL MEHMOOD CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1(5),, BHARUCH

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee (ITA No

ITA 93/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.92 & 93/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: (2016-17 & 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Al Mehmood Charitable Trust, Income Tax Officer, By Pass Road Jambusar, Vs. Ward-1(5), Bharuch. Bharuch-392150 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaata 2702 M िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/01/2023

Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154

…icer - [2021] 125 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat) • Trust For Reaching The Unreached Through Trustee vs. CIT (Exemptions) - [2021] 126 taxmann.com 77 (Gujarat) • CIT vs. Devradhan Madhavlal Genda Trust (230 ITR 714) (MP.) • CIT vs. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust - [1992] 198 ITR 511 (Calcutta) • CIT vs. Dr. L.M. Singhvi - 289 ITR 425 (Raj. HC) • CIT vs. Garment Exporters Association of Rajasthan - 386 ITR 20 (Raj. HC) • M/s. Begani Dyeing Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT [ITA No. 405 & 406/SRT/2019] 12. Based on these facts and circumstances, as narrated above, we are of the view that assessee trust is entitled to claim exemption u…

AL MEHMOOD CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1(5),, BHARUCH

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee (ITA No

ITA 92/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.92 & 93/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: (2016-17 & 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Al Mehmood Charitable Trust, Income Tax Officer, By Pass Road Jambusar, Vs. Ward-1(5), Bharuch. Bharuch-392150 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaata 2702 M िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/01/2023

Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154

…icer - [2021] 125 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat) • Trust For Reaching The Unreached Through Trustee vs. CIT (Exemptions) - [2021] 126 taxmann.com 77 (Gujarat) • CIT vs. Devradhan Madhavlal Genda Trust (230 ITR 714) (MP.) • CIT vs. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust - [1992] 198 ITR 511 (Calcutta) • CIT vs. Dr. L.M. Singhvi - 289 ITR 425 (Raj. HC) • CIT vs. Garment Exporters Association of Rajasthan - 386 ITR 20 (Raj. HC) • M/s. Begani Dyeing Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT [ITA No. 405 & 406/SRT/2019] 12. Based on these facts and circumstances, as narrated above, we are of the view that assessee trust is entitled to claim exemption u…

RITESH KUMAR GARG,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 4(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 261/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A). The Ld. Cit

For Appellant: Shri Vivek BhargavaFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 250Section 90

…ce of deduction/exemption if audit report is not filed along with the return, various High Courts have taken a view that filing of audit report is directory and not mandatory. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases :-- 1. CIT vs. LM Singhvi 289 ITR 425 (Raj)-Sec 32AB(5)(Case PB-13) 2. CIT vs Godha Chemicals 220 Taxman 31 (Raj)-Sec 80HHC(4) (Case PB-20 ) DTAA overrides the Act- It is submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a t…

Showing 1–20 of 46 · Page 1 of 3

CIT v. Hardeodas Agarwalla Trust (198 ITR 511) — Cited in 46 Judgments | BharatTax