← All Phrases

“Section 11(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 11Section 11(2)636 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 11(2) is Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr. (156 ITR 11), cited in 541 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 11(2)

Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.
156 ITR 11 · 1985 · High Court
541
citing judgments

When there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Courts, the view that favors the assessee should be preferred.

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court
524
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
143 Taxmann.com 278 · 2022 · Supreme Court
390
citing judgments

If activities for the advancement of general public utility are carried on as a business, income from such activities is not exempt under Section 11, even if the profits are utilized for the main charitable object. The argument that profits from general public utility activities can be ploughed back to charity to maintain exemption is not a good law.

Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association
121 ITR 1 · 1980 · Supreme Court
328
citing judgments

A charitable institution, whose predominant object is general public utility, can engage in non-charitable activities yielding incidental profits, provided these profits are deployed to achieve the dominant charitable object. A subsidiary object, if ancillary to the primary charitable purpose, does not negate the institution's charitable character.

Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT
101 ITR 234 · 1975 · Supreme Court
323
citing judgments

This case defines 'education' under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act as systematic instruction, schooling, or training given to the young for preparation for the work of life. It clarifies that 'education' in this context has a narrow meaning, not extending to every acquisition of further knowledge.

Escorts Ltd. v. UOI
199 ITR 43 · 1993 · Supreme Court
267
citing judgments

A statute should not be construed to permit double deduction for the same expenditure unless specifically provided by law.

Indian Molasses Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
37 ITR 66 · 1959 · Supreme Court
206
citing judgments

Expenditure is defined as money paid out or away, which is gone irretrievably. To be deductible under Section 37(1), expenditure must be wholly and exclusively for business, not capital or personal, and not fall under specific provisions of Sections 30 to 36, often justifiable on grounds of commercial expediency.

CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal
211 ITR 293 · 1995 · High Court
204
citing judgments

A charitable trust can carry forward its excess expenditure from previous years and adjust it against the income of subsequent years, which qualifies as an application of income under Section 11. Additionally, voluntary contributions received for a specific purpose are treated as corpus funds and are not taxable.

Judgments citing Section 11(2)

Navalmal Firodia Memorial Hospital Trust, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune

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

ITA 2460/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: the learned CIT(A), the same has neither been taken note of or distinguished in any manner. Not following the binding Judicial precedent of the Jurisdictional ITAT Pune is gross impropriety in law. Ground No. 2: The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw all or any of the Grounds of Appeal herein and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the appeal hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Shrenik GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sinha (Virtual)
Section 11Section 11(2)(a)Section 11(3)Section 11(3)(c)Section 12ASection 143(1)

therefore the above amount was set apart to be spent in subsequent years by furnishing a statement in prescribed Form in accordance with section 11(2)(a) of the IT Act. He submitted that financial year 2022-23 i.e. assessment year 2023-24 is the 6th year. Since the prevailing ... accumulated earlier. 16. We find some force in the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee on this issue. The provisions of section 11(2) and 11(3) of the Act as stood at the relevant time read as under: "11(1)...... (2) Where eighty-five per cent

DCIT Central Circle 7 (1), Mumbai vs. Dr D Y Patil Educational Academy, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2289/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 12ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 250

meaning of section 2(15), it has applied and/or accumulated sums as required by section 11(1)(a), the explanation thereto and section 11(2), it is duly registered under section 12A and has not violated section 13. Further there is no private gain and all the funds are ploughed

DCIT Central Circle 7 (1), Mumbai vs. Dr D Y Patil Educational Academy, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2251/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 12ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 250

meaning of section 2(15), it has applied and/or accumulated sums as required by section 11(1)(a), the explanation thereto and section 11(2), it is duly registered under section 12A and has not violated section 13. Further there is no private gain and all the funds are ploughed

Mesh Foundation, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward (E) 2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 8432/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parth ShahFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 11(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “H-SMC” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Vishnu Janardhan Shirolkar Mahajan Wady Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption)-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of

ITA 6603/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16
Section 11Section 12ASection 250Section 254(1)

taxmann.com 396 (Bom) also held that Form-10B was filed during the re-assessment by assessee-trust the benefit of accumulation under section 11(2) of the Act was available because such filing would be considered within the time allowed for furnishing return of income under section ... fulfilled, the matter is restored to the file of Jurisdictional AO to verify the facts in both the years and allow benefit of section 11(2), if the assessee fulfilled all other requisite conditions. The assessee is also directed to provide necessary detail to the Jurisdictional AO. In the result

Vishnu Janardhan Shirolkar Mahajan Wady Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption)-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of

ITA 6602/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 250Section 254(1)

taxmann.com 396 (Bom) also held that Form-10B was filed during the re-assessment by assessee-trust the benefit of accumulation under section 11(2) of the Act was available because such filing would be considered within the time allowed for furnishing return of income under section ... fulfilled, the matter is restored to the file of Jurisdictional AO to verify the facts in both the years and allow benefit of section 11(2), if the assessee fulfilled all other requisite conditions. The assessee is also directed to provide necessary detail to the Jurisdictional AO. In the result

DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Foundation, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7609/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & Dcit(Exemption)-1(1), Aditya Birla 6Th Floor, Mtnl Foundation, Building, Pedder Road, Vs. C-1, Aditya Birla Cumballa Hills, Centre, S. K. Mumbai-400 026 Ahiremarg, Worli, Mumbai-400 030 Pan/Gir No. Aaata0382P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi & Shri Surajsingh Devda, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.02.2026

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(a)Section 13(3)Section 250

allowance of expenditure) 18. The learned AR submitted that the remaining grounds relating to accumulation of income under section 11(1)(a) and section 11(2) and allowance of expenditure towards the objects of the trust are purely consequential to the main issue of allowability of exemption under section 11

DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Foundation, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7608/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & Dcit(Exemption)-1(1), Aditya Birla 6Th Floor, Mtnl Foundation, Building, Pedder Road, Vs. C-1, Aditya Birla Cumballa Hills, Centre, S. K. Mumbai-400 026 Ahiremarg, Worli, Mumbai-400 030 Pan/Gir No. Aaata0382P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi & Shri Surajsingh Devda, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.02.2026

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(a)Section 13(3)Section 250

allowance of expenditure) 18. The learned AR submitted that the remaining grounds relating to accumulation of income under section 11(1)(a) and section 11(2) and allowance of expenditure towards the objects of the trust are purely consequential to the main issue of allowability of exemption under section 11

Patan Education Society, Satara vs. ITO Exemption 1, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 705/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.705/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Patan Education Society, Vs. Ito (Exemption)-1, Shikka Mension, Patan S.O., Pune. Patan, Satara- 415206. Pan : Aaatp8412H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prateek Jha & Shri Prayag Jha Revenue By : Shri Vinod Pawar Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.01.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-2, Visakhapatnam [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Order Under Section 143(1) Without Appreciating That The Adjustment Made Was Beyond The Purview Of The Provisions Of Section 143(1).

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Pawar
Section 11Section 11(2)(c)Section 12ASection 13(9)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

date under section 139(1). 7. The Ld CIT(A) erred in rejecting the assessee's appeal without appreciating that provisions of section 11(2)(c) and section 13(9) were not applicable to the assessee's case. 8. The above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to one another

Income Tax Officer, Cumballa Hill vs. Seth Damji Laxmichand Jain Dharma Sthanak, Chinchpokali

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4824/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishincome Tax Officer Seth Damji Laxmichand Jain Room No. 617, 6Th Floor, Dharma Sthanak Mtnl Building, Peddar Road, Vs. 64 Dr. Ambedkar Road, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400 026 Opp. Kalchowki, Post Office, Chichpokali, Mumbai-400 012 Pan/Gir No. Aacts 2218 L (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hemant Jawahar Lal & Shri Ravi Ganatra Respondent By : Shri Arun Kanti Datta – Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2026 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: The Present Appeal By The Department Arises Out Of Order Dated 26.05.2025, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short), Delhi Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y. For Short) 2012-13. 2. The Effective Grounds Raised By The Department Are As Under: 1. "On The Facts & Circumstances In Allowing Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Cit(A) Erred The Benefit Of Indexed Cost Of Acquisition Trust Registered U/S. 48 Of The Act To A U/S. 12A, Disregarding Dated 19.06.1968. The Cbdt Circular No 5-P(Lxx- 2. "On The Facts & Circumstances Allowing Accumulation Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Erred In Same Being Under Section 11(1)(A) On Capital Gains, Despite The Resulting In Already Deemed As Applied Under Section 11(1A), Thereby Double Deduction". 3. "On The Facts & Circumstances To Appreciate Of The Case & In Law, He Ld. Cit(A) Failed J.K. Synthetics The Ratio Of Decision Of Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Apex Court Ltd. V. Union Of India (199 Itr 43) (Sc) Wherein The Hon'Ble Has Categorically Held That No Legislation Permit Double Can Be Construed To Specifically Deduction In Respect Of The Same Expenditure Unless Provided.

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Jawahar Lal &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta – CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 11ASection 12ASection 48

facts and circumstances remanding of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred the issue of donation out of accumulated section 11(2) income under of the Act for verification, to section despite legal bar under Explanation 11(2) of the Act" 3. As could be seen

Shree Tekchandji Maharaj Trust, Ujjain vs. Assessing Officer, Ujjain

ITA 537/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 253Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT

Uttarakhand Vikas Samiti, Udaipur vs. DCIT, CPC / ITO, Ward Exemption, Udaipur

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

ITA 257/JODH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Bleuttarakhand Vikas Samiti Vs. Dcit, Cpc/Ito, Ward Exemption, 117, Main Road, Bhupalpura, Udaipur - 313001 Udaipur - 313001 Pan No. Aaatu 3935 G Assessee By Shri Yogesh Pokharna, C.A. (Physical) Shri K.C. Meena, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 28.01.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: The Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit (A) Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Jcit Appeal”] Dated 24.01.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2018-19 Challenging Therein Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs. 6,00,000/- Without Appreciating Facts Of The Case.

Section 10BSection 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 8

considered the claim of the assessee for an amount of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- in accordance with the provision of section 11(2) of the Act. Based on this observation the solitary ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed. In view of above, we request your goodself ... considered the claim of the assessee for an amount of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- in accordance with the provision of section 11(2) of the Act. Based on this observation the solitary ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed.” 10. In the present case, the assessee fulfils

Jainacharya Devendra Muni Shikshan and Chikitsa Shodh Sansthan, Udaipur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru / ITO, Exemption Ward, Udaipur

The appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 256/JODH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blejainacharya Devendra Muni Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru/ Ito Shikshan & Chikitsa Shodh Exemption Ward Sansthan Udaipur - 313001 N H 8-1 (4) Bhuwana Udaipur (Raj) - 313001 Pan No. Aaatj 5263 G Assessee By Shri Yogesh Pokharna, C.A. (Physical) Shri K.C. Meena, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 28.01.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit (A)-1 Visakhapatnam [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Jcit Appeal”] Dated 05.03.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2016-17 Challenging Therein Disallowance Of Capital Expenditure Amounting To Rs. 24,75,863/- In Corpus Fund Of Rs. 6,09,448/- Without Appreciating The Merits Of The Case.

Section 11(2)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Shree Tarak Guru Jain Granthalya, Udaipur vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru / ITO (Exemption), Udaipur

ITA 22/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 1Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ba)Section 13(9)Section 139(5)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)(A)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Shree Tarak Guru Jain Granthalya, Udaipur vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru / ITO (Exemption), Udaipur

ITA 21/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 1Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ba)Section 13(9)Section 139(5)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)(A)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

ITA 1670/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

paper book. Further, he drew our attention to page 111 of the paper book showing accumulated sum of ₹.1,61,00,000/- under section 11(2) of the Act along with Form 10A belatedly seeking condonation under section 119(2)(b) of the Act before ... also in the knowledge of the Assessing Officer setting apart the accumulated sum of ₹.1,61,00,000/- for future application under section 11(2) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is fully satisfied with the activities of the assessee as charitable in nature and allowed exemption under section

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,

ITA 1669/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

paper book. Further, he drew our attention to page 111 of the paper book showing accumulated sum of %.1,61,00,000/- under section 11(2) of the Act along with Form 10A belatedly seeking condonation under section 119(2)(b) of the Act before ... also in the knowledge of the Assessing Officer setting apart the accumulated sum of %.1,61,00,000/- for future application under section 11(2) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is fully satisfied with the activities of the assessee as charitable in nature and allowed exemption under section

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-4, Chennai

ITA 1667/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Street, Adambakkam, Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 4, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit 28.10.2025 21.01.2026 : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश/Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

paper book. Further, he drew our attention to page 111 of the paper book showing accumulated sum of ₹.1,61,00,000/- under section 11(2) of the Act along with Form 10A belatedly seeking condonation under section 119(2)(b) of the Act before ... also in the knowledge of the Assessing Officer setting apart the accumulated sum of ₹.1,61,00,000/- for future application under section 11(2) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is fully satisfied with the activities of the assessee as charitable in nature and allowed exemption under section

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

passed by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the Ld.CIT(A)”], for assessment year 2017-18, on following grounds of appeal:- “1. DELETION OF ACCUMULATION UNDER SECTION 11(2) AMOUNTING TO 770,37,775/- OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, AND REJECTING FORM NO.10 FILED ALONG WITH RETURN OF INCOME [a] The Commissioner ... fact and in law in rejecting Form No.10 filed by the appellant Trust and thereby denying accumulation of 770,37,775/- under Section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. [b] The objects of the Trust having been accepted as charitable, the appellant ought not have been subjected

Centre for General Education Society, Ghaziabad vs. CIT(Exemption), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2423/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhricentre For General Vs. Cit Exemption Education Society, Lucknow A-16, Site-3, Merrut Road Upside Indl. Area, Ghaziabad (Pan: Aaatc8262G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Govind Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Jitender Singh, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Govind Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SMT. RENU