CIT v. Idicula Trust Society

104 DTR 9High Court2014#7552 most cited

What is CIT v. Idicula Trust Society authority for?

Remuneration drawn by heads of charitable institutions is permissible if it is neither excessive nor unreasonable, and the department cannot dictate the methods of operation.

15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Idicula Trust Society · section 13(3) · section 13(1)(c) · section 11 · remuneration to trustee · excessive remuneration · unreasonable remuneration · charitable trust operations

Also reported as

223 Taxmann 6645 Taxmann.com 158

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 12Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 13(3)section 13(1)(c)section 13(1)section 12asection 12salarysection 11previous yearsection 143(2)section 13personsection 143(3)

Judgments citing CIT v. Idicula Trust Society

Kandi Friends Educational Trust, Ropar vs. Deputy Commission of Income Tax, Cl. 1, Exemption, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 798/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 797 & 798/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15, 2015-16 Kandi Friends Educational The DCIT, Trust, Bhaddal Campus, Vs Circle-1, Exemption, Village – Bhaddal, Roopnagar. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAATK2935N Shri Ashok Goyal, CA Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 20.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 15.07.2025 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YAD…

Kandi Friends Educational Trust, Ropar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 797/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 797 & 798/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15, 2015-16 Kandi Friends Educational The DCIT, Trust, Bhaddal Campus, Vs Circle-1, Exemption, Village – Bhaddal, Roopnagar. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAATK2935N Shri Ashok Goyal, CA Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 20.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 15.07.2025 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YAD…

DCIT, C-1 (Exemptions), Chandigarh vs. The Institution of Civil Engineers Society, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 52/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ, चण्डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘” CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ ITA No. 52/CHD/2023 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The DCIT, Vs The Institution of Civil Engineers Circle - 1 (Exemptions), Chandigarh. Society, Bindra Complex, Model Town, Ludhiana. स्थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AABAT4612M अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 17.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement :…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 30/CHANDI/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…re payment of salary to the above persons is bad in law and liable to be deleted. 1.2 Judicial Precedents ITA 02/Chd/2020 & 7 Ors. M/s Manav Mangal Society Vs DCIT(E) 1.2.1 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society [2014] 104 DTR 9 (P&H) 1.2.2 The Hon'ble Karanataka HC in CIT vs. CMR Jnanadhara Trust [2015] 92 CCH 396 (Kar), 1.2.3 The Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Dr.D.Y. Patil Pratisthan vs. DCIT[2013] 154 TTJ 320 (Pune ITAT. 1.2.4 The Hyderabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (Exemption) - Ill vs. Gideon's Int…

M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…re payment of salary to the above persons is bad in law and liable to be deleted. 1.2 Judicial Precedents ITA 02/Chd/2020 & 7 Ors. M/s Manav Mangal Society Vs DCIT(E) 1.2.1 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society [2014] 104 DTR 9 (P&H) 1.2.2 The Hon'ble Karanataka HC in CIT vs. CMR Jnanadhara Trust [2015] 92 CCH 396 (Kar), 1.2.3 The Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Dr.D.Y. Patil Pratisthan vs. DCIT[2013] 154 TTJ 320 (Pune ITAT. 1.2.4 The Hyderabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (Exemption) - Ill vs. Gideon's Int…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 29/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…re payment of salary to the above persons is bad in law and liable to be deleted. 1.2 Judicial Precedents ITA 02/Chd/2020 & 7 Ors. M/s Manav Mangal Society Vs DCIT(E) 1.2.1 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society [2014] 104 DTR 9 (P&H) 1.2.2 The Hon'ble Karanataka HC in CIT vs. CMR Jnanadhara Trust [2015] 92 CCH 396 (Kar), 1.2.3 The Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Dr.D.Y. Patil Pratisthan vs. DCIT[2013] 154 TTJ 320 (Pune ITAT. 1.2.4 The Hyderabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (Exemption) - Ill vs. Gideon's Int…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 28/CHANDI/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…re payment of salary to the above persons is bad in law and liable to be deleted. 1.2 Judicial Precedents ITA 02/Chd/2020 & 7 Ors. M/s Manav Mangal Society Vs DCIT(E) 1.2.1 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society [2014] 104 DTR 9 (P&H) 1.2.2 The Hon'ble Karanataka HC in CIT vs. CMR Jnanadhara Trust [2015] 92 CCH 396 (Kar), 1.2.3 The Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Dr.D.Y. Patil Pratisthan vs. DCIT[2013] 154 TTJ 320 (Pune ITAT. 1.2.4 The Hyderabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (Exemption) - Ill vs. Gideon's Int…

DCIT, Circle-1(Exemption), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal School( Manav Mangal Society), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 27/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…re payment of salary to the above persons is bad in law and liable to be deleted. 1.2 Judicial Precedents ITA 02/Chd/2020 & 7 Ors. M/s Manav Mangal Society Vs DCIT(E) 1.2.1 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society [2014] 104 DTR 9 (P&H) 1.2.2 The Hon'ble Karanataka HC in CIT vs. CMR Jnanadhara Trust [2015] 92 CCH 396 (Kar), 1.2.3 The Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Dr.D.Y. Patil Pratisthan vs. DCIT[2013] 154 TTJ 320 (Pune ITAT. 1.2.4 The Hyderabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (Exemption) - Ill vs. Gideon's Int…

M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 2/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…re payment of salary to the above persons is bad in law and liable to be deleted. 1.2 Judicial Precedents ITA 02/Chd/2020 & 7 Ors. M/s Manav Mangal Society Vs DCIT(E) 1.2.1 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society [2014] 104 DTR 9 (P&H) 1.2.2 The Hon'ble Karanataka HC in CIT vs. CMR Jnanadhara Trust [2015] 92 CCH 396 (Kar), 1.2.3 The Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Dr.D.Y. Patil Pratisthan vs. DCIT[2013] 154 TTJ 320 (Pune ITAT. 1.2.4 The Hyderabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (Exemption) - Ill vs. Gideon's Int…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…re payment of salary to the above persons is bad in law and liable to be deleted. 1.2 Judicial Precedents ITA 02/Chd/2020 & 7 Ors. M/s Manav Mangal Society Vs DCIT(E) 1.2.1 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society [2014] 104 DTR 9 (P&H) 1.2.2 The Hon'ble Karanataka HC in CIT vs. CMR Jnanadhara Trust [2015] 92 CCH 396 (Kar), 1.2.3 The Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Dr.D.Y. Patil Pratisthan vs. DCIT[2013] 154 TTJ 320 (Pune ITAT. 1.2.4 The Hyderabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (Exemption) - Ill vs. Gideon's Int…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 136/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…re payment of salary to the above persons is bad in law and liable to be deleted. 1.2 Judicial Precedents ITA 02/Chd/2020 & 7 Ors. M/s Manav Mangal Society Vs DCIT(E) 1.2.1 The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society [2014] 104 DTR 9 (P&H) 1.2.2 The Hon'ble Karanataka HC in CIT vs. CMR Jnanadhara Trust [2015] 92 CCH 396 (Kar), 1.2.3 The Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of Dr.D.Y. Patil Pratisthan vs. DCIT[2013] 154 TTJ 320 (Pune ITAT. 1.2.4 The Hyderabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of DDIT (Exemption) - Ill vs. Gideon's Int…

M/S Heritage Educational Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

ITA 1071/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, JCIT (Sr. DR)
Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…the qualified trustees u/s 13 (l)(c) r.w. section 13(3) and 164(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Idicula Trust Society, Faridabad as reported in 104 DTR 9. 6. That the addition have been made against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Vide Ground Nos. 1 to 3 the assessee has raised the legal issue challenging the validity of the reopening while ground Nos. 4 & 5 relates to the issue on merit relating to the sustenance of addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of sa…

M/S Heritage Educational Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

ITA 1070/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2020AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, JCIT (Sr. DR)
Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…the qualified trustees u/s 13 (l)(c) r.w. section 13(3) and 164(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Idicula Trust Society, Faridabad as reported in 104 DTR 9. 6. That the addition have been made against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Vide Ground Nos. 1 to 3 the assessee has raised the legal issue challenging the validity of the reopening while ground Nos. 4 & 5 relates to the issue on merit relating to the sustenance of addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of sa…

M/S Heritage Educational Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

ITA 1069/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2020AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, JCIT (Sr. DR)
Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…the qualified trustees u/s 13 (l)(c) r.w. section 13(3) and 164(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Idicula Trust Society, Faridabad as reported in 104 DTR 9. 6. That the addition have been made against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Vide Ground Nos. 1 to 3 the assessee has raised the legal issue challenging the validity of the reopening while ground Nos. 4 & 5 relates to the issue on merit relating to the sustenance of addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of sa…

Indian Education Society, Hisar vs. CIT, Hisar

The appeal is allowed

ITA 941/DEL/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2016

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri O.P. Kant Assessment Year: -- Indian Education Society, Vs. Cit 705- Yadav Colony, Aayakar Bhawan, Hisar (Hr.) Hisar (Hr.) (Pan: Aaati3921J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Dinesh Gupta, Ca & Raja Kumar, Adv. Department By: Shri A.K. Saroha, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 28 .01.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 26 :04.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Appellant – Indian Education Society (The Society For Short) Has Preferred This Appeal Against The Cancellation Of Registration Under Section 12Aa Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 By The Learned Cit On The Following Four Grounds: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit Erred In Holding That The Assessee Society Did Not Exist For Educational Purposes, Without Assigning Any Cogent Reasoning For This Conclusion; 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit Erred In Ordering Cancellation Of The Assessee’S Registration Under Section 12-Aa Of The Income-Tax Act;

For Appellant: S/Shri Dinesh Gupta, CA & RajaFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT(DR)
Section 12Section 12ASection 133A

…his needs from his other bodies and entities. Even otherwise any head of the institution is entitled to draw remuneration such that it is neither excessive nor unreasonable. This has been ruled specifically in the case of CIT vs. Idicula Trust Society (2014) 104 DTR 9(P&H) by the Hon’ble jurisdiction High Court itself. So any complaint on this point is meaningless unless either excessiveness or unreasonableness is specifically pointed out. The authorities running the institutions can device their own ways and procedure for carrying out the activities. The department cannot prescribe the method by which an entity…

CIT v. Idicula Trust Society (104 DTR 9) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax