Tamil Nadu Cricket Association 360 ITR 633; Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust v. CIT

178 ITD 338Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#23188 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 12AA Section 12AB(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 12aa(3)section 12ab(4)section 13(1)(c)cancellation of registration proviso to section 2(15)section 13(1)section 2(15)registration under section 12a section 12aa section 12ab section 12a section 10

Judgments citing Tamil Nadu Cricket Association 360 ITR 633; Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust v. CIT

Richmond Educational Society, Noida vs. DCIT/ACIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad

ITA 4779/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…enial of exemption under section 11 should be limited only to amount which was diverted in violation of section 13(2)(b). The Learned AR also placed reliance on the Co-ordinate Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta vs CIT reported in 178 ITD 338 (Mum Trib). The relevant operative portion of the said order of the Tribunal is reproduced below:- “11. In the present case, the case sought to be made out by the Commissioner is that the violation carried out by the assessee would lead to denial of exemption u/s.11 & 13 of the Act and, therefore, the pre-requisite of section 12AA(3) of the Act i…

Advantage India, New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT (Central)-II, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 634/DEL/2019[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mehra, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT [DR]

Section 127Section 127(2)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

…tions under section 13 does not itself lead to the conclusion that the activities are not in accordance with the objects of the trust. The ld AR relied on the decision of Tamil Nadu Cricket Association 360 ITR 633; Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust Vs CIT 178 ITD 338 (Mumbai ITAT) and Welham Boys School 285 ITR 74 (Uttarkhand HC). 12. The ld AR further took another argument that the PCIT(C) had no jurisdiction to cancel the registration certificate once granted by him u/s 12A with retrospective effect, there being no express provision in the section. The ld AR relied on the decision of State of Rajasthan Vs…

Sunil Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-55(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 634/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraadvantage India Vs. The Pr. C.I.T 101-102, Oriental House Central - 2 Gulmohar Enclave New Delhi New Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mehra, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT [DR]

Section 127Section 127(2)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

…ns under section 13 does not itself lead to the conclusion that the activities are not in accordance with the objects of the trust. The ld AR relied on the decision of Tamil Nadu Cricket Association 360 ITR 633; Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust Vs CIT 178 ITD 338 (Mumbai ITAT) and Welham Boys School 285 ITR 74 (Uttarkhand HC). 12. The ld AR further took another argument that the PCIT(C) had no jurisdiction to cancel the registration certificate once granted by him u/s 12A with retrospective effect, there being no express provision in the section. The ld AR relied on the decision of State of Rajasthan V…