How many judgments cite DIT(E) v. Daulat Ram Education Society?

17 judgments on BharatTax cite DIT(E) v. Daulat Ram Education Society (278 ITR 260), spanning 2014 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does DIT(E) v. Daulat Ram Education Society come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11(2), Section 11(6), Section 12A, Section 11, Section 11(1)(a), Section 11(1)(b).

DIT(E) v. Daulat Ram Education Society

278 ITR 260High Court2005#6619 most cited

What is DIT(E) v. Daulat Ram Education Society authority for?

For an accumulation of income under section 11(2) to be allowed, the details of the plan for utilization are not necessary if the stated purpose is in consonance with the charitable objects of the trust. So long as one or more of the purposes specified by the assessee are charitable and find place in the trust's incorporated objects, the benefit under section 11 must flow to the assessee.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

DIT(E) v. Daulat Ram Education Society · section 11(2) · section 11 · charitable purpose · accumulation of income · registration under section 12a · objects of the society · form no. 10

Sections most often in play

Section 11(2)Section 11(6)Section 12A Section 11 Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(b)Section 11(3)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

accumulation of income section 11(3)section 11(6)section 11(2)section 11(1)child section 12a registration under section 12a capital expenditure section 11 section 12 salary

Judgments citing DIT(E) v. Daulat Ram Education Society

Senior Citizen Santacruz ( Paschim) Sanstha, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption)-2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 7183/MUM/2025[7183]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12A

…bmission:-  Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bharat Krishak Samaj vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) reported in ITA No. 831/Del/2002 and 1384/Del/2002; AY 1997-98  Director of Income Tax vs. Daulatram Education Society reported in (2005) 278 ITR 260 (Delhi). 6 I.T.A. No. 7183/Mum/2025  Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in CIT(Exemptions) vs. Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purshottam Public Charitable Charitable turst reported in [2019] 102 Taxmann.com 122 (Gujarat)  Hon’ble Telangana and Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Samaj Seva Nidhi vs. ACIT reported in [2015] 376 ITR 507 (T&AP)  Arhat…

Salwan Education Trust, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Exmp 2(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 5275/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Salwan Education Trust, Dcit, Salwan Schools Campus, Pt Exemption 2(1), Girdhari Lal Salwan Marg, Vs Delhi, Rajinder Nagar, 24Th Floor, Civic Centre, New Delhi-110060, New Delhi-110002. Pan- Aacts9741A Assessee Revenue

Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

….1. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee reiterating its submissions made during the assessment proceedings also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Daulat Ram, Education Society [2005] 278 ITR 260, which held that so long as one or more of the purposes ITA No.- 5275/Del/2024 Salwan Educa"on Trust specified by the assessee finds place in the objects for which the society had been incorporated, and so long as said purpose are charitable in character, the benefit admissible u/s 11 must flow to the assessee. However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not ag…

ACIT, Kolkata vs. Bandhan Konnagar, Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1593/KOL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80G

…s of the assessee-company were not for charitable purpose. The finding by the Tribunal was essentially a finding of fact giving rise to no question of law.” In another case of Delhi High Court in OIT (Exemption) Vs. Daulat Education Society reported in (2006) 278 ITR 260 (Del), it is held that details of plan to be given is not necessary, if the purpose specified is in consonance with the objects. The judgment of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust (supra) as relied upon by the learned O.R. is distinguishable on facts as in that case all the objects as per law of the…

The Bombay Catholic Sabha, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption)-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3205/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Mandir Vaidya, A/RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D/R

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12A

…in the light of the judicial precedents as laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hotel and Restaurant Association (261 ITR 190) and decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(E) v Daulat Ram Education Society (2005) 278 ITR 260 (Del) and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(E) v Nbie Welfare Society (2015) 370 ITR 490 (Del), we are inclined to allow the prayer of the assessee to allow accumulation of income u/s 11(2) of the Act of Rs.38,38,781/- by taking note of the facts and the ratio of the Hon'ble High Court decisions (supra) which were no…

DCIT, C-1 (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Shri Aurobindo Socio Economic & Management Research Institute, Ludhina

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 1375/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)

…ccumulated amount. Reliance has been placed on : i) Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs Envisions, 378 ITR 483 (Kar)”; ii) CIT Vs Gokula Education Foundation, 394 ITR 236 (Kar); and iii) Director of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs Daulat Ram Education Society, 278 ITR 260 (Del). 17.3 It has been stated that this issue did not arise in assessment year 2014-15, since in that year, there was no surplus. 17.4 The ld. DR has, here too, placed reliance on the impugned order. ITA 1348 & 1375/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 15 17.5 This Ground corresponds to Ground No. 8 before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. DR has placed reliance on t…

Sir Aurobindo Socio Economic & Management Research Institute, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, C-1 (E), Chandigarh

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 1348/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)

The Bombay Catholic Sabha, Mumbai vs. ITO Exemption Ward 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3793/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3793/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Bombay Catholic बिधम/ Ito (Exem)-2(4) Sabha Piramal Chamber, Lal Vs. St. Michael’S Church Baug, Parel, Mumbai- Compound, Mahhim (W), 400012. Mumbai-400016. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatt3348L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. AR)

Section 11Section 11(2)

…ng rise to no question of law. 7. We, accordingly, decline to entertain the appeal. The same is dismissed.” 7. The Ld. Sr. Counsel drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(E) v Daulat Ram Education Society (2005) 278 ITR 260 (Del) wherein the Hon’ble High Court reiterated the judicial precedent laid down in Hotel and Restaurant Association (supra) and observed as under: - “4. The Tribunal has placed reliance upon the judgment of a Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Hotel & Restaurant Association [2003] 261 ITR 190. In that case also the assessee had accumulated t…

Baljeevan Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exem. Ward 1(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1872/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1872/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Bal Jeevan Trust बिधम/ Ito (E), Ward-1(1) A/14, Sterling Apartments, Piramal Chamber, Lal Vs. Peddar Road, Mumbai- Baug, Parel, Mumbai- 400026. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatb2973M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri J. D. Mistri Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 15.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Not Allowing The Accumulation Of Rs.30 Lakhs As Per Section 11(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Read With Rule 17 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (Hereinafter “The Rules”).

For Appellant: Shri J. D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12A

…7 A.Y. 2016-17 Bal Jeevan Trust 7. We, accordingly, decline to entertain the appeal. The same is dismissed.” 7. The Ld. Sr. Counsel drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(E) v Daulat Ram Education Society (2005) 278 ITR 260 (Del) wherein the Hon’ble High Court reiterated the judicial precedent laid down in Hotel and Restaurant Association (supra) and observed as under: - “4. The Tribunal has placed reliance upon the judgment of a Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Hotel & Restaurant Association [2003] 261 ITR 190. In that case also the assessee had accumulated t…

Sri Dattatreya Sai Ashram Trust, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO Exemption, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/CTK/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR

Section 1Section 139Section 143(1)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

…e completion of the assessment and there is only a technical plea raised by the revenue then that should not take away the benefit of accumulation in accordance with law. 7. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Daulat Ram Education Society, reported in 278 ITR 260 after referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Nagpur Hotel Owners’ Association, referred to supra, considered the question as to whether the prescription of Form No.10 for the purpose of accumulation u/s.11(2) of the Act was mandatory or directory, and came to the conclusion that the requirement of filing of Form No.…

Himalayan Buddhist Cultural Association, Kullu vs. ACIT, Circle/DCIT CPC, Bengluru, Mandi

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

ITA 177/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Due Date Of Filling Of Income Tax Return Was On Bonafide Grounds, The Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Condoning The Delay.

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manveet Singh Sehgal, Addl. CIT

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)

…C) • CIT(E) Vs. Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purshottam Public Cable Trust [2019] 105 taxmann.com 97(SC) • CIT Vs. Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purshottam Public Charitable Trust [2019] 102 taxmann.com 122 (Gujarat HC) • DIT(E) Vs. Daulat Ram Education Society [2005] 278 ITR 260 (Delhi HC) • DIT(E) Vs. NBIE Welfare Society, New Delhi [2015] 54 taxmann.com 196 (Delhi) (Delhi HC) • Arhatic Yoga Ashram Management Trust Vs. ITO (ITA No. 2920/CHNY/2017) (Dt. 20/01/2021) 7. In his rival submissions the Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and reiterated the observations made by the Ld. CIT(A) in the im…

ITO (E), Ward- 1(2), New Delhi vs. Indian Oil Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 206/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) Ito(E) Vs. M/S. Indian Oil Foundation, Ward – 1(2), Scope Complex, Core-Ii, 7, New Delhi Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110003. Pan No. Aaati 2737 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Anima Baranwal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.08.2021

Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…mulated surplus to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A). CIT(A) by relying on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs. Daulat Ram Education Society (2005) 278 ITR 260 (Delhi), Bharat Krishak Samaj vs DDIT (E) (2008) 166 Taxman 147 (Delhi) and various other decisions, held that the contention of the AO that the amount could have been accumulated only for the some specific purpose and not for the general purpose does not hold good. CIT(A) thus deleted the addition made by the AO. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A)…

Muniwar Abad Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) I(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1722/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Muniwar Abad Charitable Dy. Director Of Trust Income-Tax Vs. 405A/407, Jolly Bhavan No. 1, (Exemption)-I-(1), 10, New Marine Lines, 6Th Floor, Piramal Mumbai-400020. Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Aaatm0140K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. B.V. Jhaveri, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ram Tiwari, Dr Date Of Hearing : 06/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. B.V. Jhaveri, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ram Tiwari, DR

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)

…the said land for constructing houses for economically weaker section families and allot the houses at subsidised rate (below cost) and also for middle income group families. Reliance is placed by him on the decision in DIT(E) v. Daulat Ram Education Society 278 ITR 260, Bharat Krishak Samaj v. DDIT(E) 306 ITR 153 (Del.), Bharat Kalyan Pratisthan v. DIT(E) 299 ITR 406 (Del.), CIT(E) v. Gokula Education Foundation (Karn.) & DIT(E) v. Envisions 378 ITR 483 (Karn.) 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supports the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submits that the vague, general and unreconciled accumulations of amount in th…

Mool Chand Khairati Ram Trust vs. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/141/2013HC Delhi27 Jul 2015

For Appellant: Mr C.S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate withFor Respondent: Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Junior Standing Counsel

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 260A

…ions rendered by this Court in CIT v. Hotel & Restaurant Association: (2003) 261 ITR 190 (Del.), Bharat Kalyan Pratisthan v. Director of Income-Tax (Exemption): (2008) 299 ITR 406, Director of Income-Tax (Exemption) v. Daulat Ram Education Society: (2005) 278 ITR 260 (Del.), Director of Income-Tax (Exemption) v. Mamta Health Institute for Mother and Children: (2007) 293 ITR 380 (Del.) and NBIE Welfare Society (supra). In these decisions, the Court affirmed that if income is accumulated for applying towards the object of the Trust, which is wholly charitable or religious, the exemption under Section 11(2…

Vidyaniketan Education and Cultural Trust, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed, while the stay petition by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1349/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P.George

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Shankar Prasad, K., Jt. CIT(DR)

Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

…We have heard the rival submissions. The learned DR relied on the order of the CIT(A) and the reasons given by him. The learned counsel for the Assessee relied on decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(E) Vs. Daulat Ram Education Society 278 ITR 260 (Delhi). The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the said case has held that that purpose mentioned in Form 10 for accumulation of income need not be specific and that accumulation of income under section 11(2) cannot be denied even if purpose/objects mentioned in Form 10 are general. 17. We have given a very careful consideration to the rival submissio…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S the Karnataka State Cricket Association, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 71/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Farahat Hussain Qureshi, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

…following cases i.e. Bharat Krishik Samaj v DDlT [2008] 306 ITR 153 (Delhi); Bharat Kalyan Pratisthan v DIT (Exemption) [2008] 299 ITR 406 (Delhi); DIT v Mamta Health Institute [2007] 293 ITR 380 (Delhi); DIT (Exemption) v Daulat Ram Education Society [2005] 278 ITR 260 (Delhi) & CIT v Hotel & Restaurant Association [2003] 261 ITR 190 (Delhi) has held that that purpose mentioned in Form 10 for accumulation of income need not be specific and was held that accumulation of income under section 11(2) cannot be denied even if purpose/objects mentioned in Form 10 are general. Though there are divergent views on the su…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. M/S Nbie Welfare Society, New Delhi

The appeal is disposed of

ITA - 67 / 2003HC Delhi03 Dec 2014

Section 11Section 11(2)

…and these purposes were the objects of the institution, then it is permissible for the assessed to accumulate income for utilization of these objects. Reference was also made to the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Daulat Ram Education Society (2005) 278 ITR 260 (Delhi) wherein, the assessee had specified eight purposes under Section 11 (2) of the Act. This it was held was permissible. Thereafter, the High Court observed as under:- “12 In the present case, the assessed has only three objects as far as its trust deed, a copy of which has been placed on record, is concerned. The trust deed requires…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption)

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/67/2003HC Delhi03 Dec 2014

Section 11Section 11(2)