Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) v. CIT

172 ITR 154High Court1988#8835 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 12ASection 12Section 143(1)Section 10(23BBA)Section 12ABSection 69ASection 80G

Issues it is cited on

section 10abextension of limitationdelay in filing appealsection 148aliable to taxsection 12absection 80gsection 12asection 143(1)condonation of delaysection 12section 11

Judgments citing Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) v. CIT

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., WARD-3, WARANGAL.

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

ITA 326/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.326/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Sri Someshwara Laxmi Narasimha Swamy Temple, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-3, Palakurthy, Warangal – 506001 Warangal – 506 252. Telangana. Pan Aagas8382Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वधिध/Assessee By : Ca Ka Sai Prasad िधजस् व द्वधिध/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधिीख/Date Of Hearing: 29.01.2026 घोषणध की तधिीख/Pronouncement: 06.02.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.02.2024 Of The Learned Cit(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short “Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2

For Appellant: CA KA Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 12A

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the assessment order is u/sec.143(1), the 11 ITA.No.326/Hy…

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 141/HYD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1408/Hyd/2024 To 1410/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasimha Swamy Temple Exemption Palakurthy Ward-1(4) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.141/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Commissioner Of Narasimha Swamy Temple Income Tax Palakurthy (Exemptions) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 22/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Three Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, All Dated 08.10.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Respectively & Order Dated 26.02.2024 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [“Ld.Cit(E)”], Whereby The Application Of The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Was Rejected.

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 12A

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the assessment order is u/sec.143(1), the Assessing Office…

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., EXEMPTION WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1410/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1408/Hyd/2024 To 1410/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasimha Swamy Temple Exemption Palakurthy Ward-1(4) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.141/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Commissioner Of Narasimha Swamy Temple Income Tax Palakurthy (Exemptions) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 22/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Three Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, All Dated 08.10.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Respectively & Order Dated 26.02.2024 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [“Ld.Cit(E)”], Whereby The Application Of The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Was Rejected.

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 12A

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the assessment order is u/sec.143(1), the Assessing Office…

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., EXEMPTION, WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1409/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1408/Hyd/2024 To 1410/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasimha Swamy Temple Exemption Palakurthy Ward-1(4) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.141/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Commissioner Of Narasimha Swamy Temple Income Tax Palakurthy (Exemptions) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 22/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Three Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, All Dated 08.10.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Respectively & Order Dated 26.02.2024 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [“Ld.Cit(E)”], Whereby The Application Of The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Was Rejected.

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 12A

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the assessment order is u/sec.143(1), the Assessing Office…

SRI SOMESHWARA LAXMI NARASIMHA SWAMY TEMPLE PALAKURTHY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., EXEMPTION, WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1408/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1408/Hyd/2024 To 1410/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Narasimha Swamy Temple Exemption Palakurthy Ward-1(4) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.141/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Sri Someshwara Laxmi Vs. Commissioner Of Narasimha Swamy Temple Income Tax Palakurthy (Exemptions) Pan : Aagas8382Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 22/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Three Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, All Dated 08.10.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Respectively & Order Dated 26.02.2024 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [“Ld.Cit(E)”], Whereby The Application Of The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) Was Rejected.

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 12A

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the assessment order is u/sec.143(1), the Assessing Office…

THE ZOOS AND PARKS AUTHORITY OF TELANGANA, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the 05 appeals ITA

ITA 118/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 80G

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the 15 ITA.No.114 to 118/Hyd./2025 assessment order is u/s…

THE ZOOS AND PARKS AUTHORITY OF TELANGANA, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the 05 appeals ITA

ITA 117/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 80G

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the 15 ITA.No.114 to 118/Hyd./2025 assessment order is u/s…

THE ZOOS AND PARKS AUTHORITY OF TELANGANA, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the 05 appeals ITA

ITA 116/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 80G

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the 15 ITA.No.114 to 118/Hyd./2025 assessment order is u/s…

THE ZOOS AND PARKS AUTHORITY OF TELANGANA, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the 05 appeals ITA

ITA 115/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 80G

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the 15 ITA.No.114 to 118/Hyd./2025 assessment order is u/s…

THE ZOOS AND PARKS AUTHORITY OF TELANGANA, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the 05 appeals ITA

ITA 114/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 80G

…ITAT-C-Bench, Chennai in the case of Kingston Educational Trust vs., DCIT (supra) where the Tribunal after considering certain judicial precedents in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs., CIT [1988] 172 ITR 154 (MP) held that, only net income needs to be taxed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are erred in taxing gross receipts of the assessee society instead of net income as per the financial statements. However, fact remains that since the 15 ITA.No.114 to 118/Hyd./2025 assessment order is u/s…

SHRI NAMDEV SAMAJ TANK SHASTRIYA VIKAS SAMITI AND SHODH SANSTHAN,NEW HOUSING BOARD KISHANGARH vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

ITA 776/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80G

…is used in much wider sense and it connotes the assessable figure arrived at after accounting for all the legitimate deductions and exemption. This view was reiterated by Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs. CIT, (1988) 172 ITR 154. Therefore in the present case, when the Assessing Officer considered the gross receipts as income, he should also have considered the expenditure claimed to be incurred in connection with earning of gross receipts. In the event, he feels that it requires verification whether or not, the expenditure was incurred for earning gross receipts then th…

KINGSTON EDUCATIONAL TRUST,TIVUVANNAMALAI vs. DCIT CPC , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 567/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.567/Chny/2019. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-2016. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Kingston Educational Trust, No.33, New Street, Income, Vandavasi Cpc, Thiruvannamalai 604 408. Bengaluru. [Pan Aabtk 9005E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Helen Ruby Jesindha, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 2

…is used in much wider sense and it connotes the assessable figure arrived at after accounting for all the legitimate deductions and exemption. This view was reiterated by Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) vs. CIT, (1988) 172 ITR 154. Therefore in the present case, when the Assessing Officer considered the gross receipts as income, he should also have considered the expenditure claimed to be incurred in connection with earning of gross receipts. In the event, he feels that it requires verification whether or not, the expenditure was incurred for earning gross receipts then…

Kaluram Ganeshram (HUF) v. CIT (172 ITR 154) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax