← 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)

Haryana Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board, Panchkula vs. DCIT, Exemption, Sector 17

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 339/CHANDI/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 263

National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred both on facts and law in not allowing the benefit of accumulations as per provisions of Section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act on the ground that the notice of accumulation given by the appellant was not as per provisions ... That the Ld. First Appellate Authority has erred both on facts and law in not allowing the statutory reduction of 15% allowable under section 11(2) of the Income tax Act, thus making whole of the receipts amounting to Rs.4,86,73,08,657 liable to be treated as income

Haryana Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board, Panchkula vs. DCIT, Exemption, Chandigarh

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 338/CHANDI/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 263

National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred both on facts and law in not allowing the benefit of accumulations as per provisions of Section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act on the ground that the notice of accumulation given by the appellant was not as per provisions ... That the Ld. First Appellate Authority has erred both on facts and law in not allowing the statutory reduction of 15% allowable under section 11(2) of the Income tax Act, thus making whole of the receipts amounting to Rs.4,86,73,08,657 liable to be treated as income

Haryana Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board, Panchkula vs. CIT(Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 63/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 263

National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred both on facts and law in not allowing the benefit of accumulations as per provisions of Section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act on the ground that the notice of accumulation given by the appellant was not as per provisions ... That the Ld. First Appellate Authority has erred both on facts and law in not allowing the statutory reduction of 15% allowable under section 11(2) of the Income tax Act, thus making whole of the receipts amounting to Rs.4,86,73,08,657 liable to be treated as income

Shri Multanchand Bora Trust, Pune vs. ACIT, Exemption, Circle- Aurangabad, Aurangabad

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1312/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1312/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri Multanchand Bora Trust, V The Assistant/Deputy 132B/2A, Ganeshkhind Road, S. Commissioner Of Income Pune – 411007. Tax, Exemption Circle, Aurangabad. Pan: Aafts3329F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Shrenik Gandhi Revenue By Shri Amit Bobde –Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune At Nashik Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21, Dated 30.03.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act, Dated 20.09.2022. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Ground No. 1: The Learned Cit (Exemption) Seriously Erred On The Facts & Law, In Exercising The Revisionary Powers Under Section

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

examine this issue as well. Similar is the case regarding the issue of utilization of accumulated income beyond the prescribed period under section 11(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, absence of any detailed inquires or verification of these crucial aspects rendered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial ... Donee trust was charitable or not!Ld.CIT(Exemption) also observed that accumulation of income was not applied within five years as per section 11(2) of the Act. 9. In this case, we have carefully studied the paper book filed by the Assessee. We have gone through notices issued

Kailashpuri Seva Samiti, Mumbai vs. ITO 1(4) Exemptions, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5658/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr.-DR
Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No

ACIT, Exemptions, Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. Vyakti Vikas Kendra India, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1656/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 10(23)(iiiad)Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. The assessee's case before the authorities below is this that explanation to section 11(2) of the Act applies only in respect of the donations and contributions made in respect of accumulated income and not in respect of donations ... income and claimed deduction. The Hon'ble ITAT observed that the restriction imposed by section 11(3)(d) applies to income under section 11(2) and not to current year's income or to accumulation under section 11(1) and thus assessee's claim was allowed. ACIT Exemptions vs. Vyakti

The Indus Entrepreneurs, Hyderabad vs. DCIT - Exemption Circle 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 559/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.559/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2018-2019 The Indus Entrepreneurs, The Dcit-(Exemption), Vs. Hyderabad-500084. Circle-1(1), Pan Aabat0359F Hyderabad – 500 029. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri M V Swaroop, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Mookambikeyan S. Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri M V Swaroop, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Mookambikeyan S. Sr. AR
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘SMC’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE : SHRI MANJUNATHA

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Lucknow vs. M/S. Indian Institute of Carpet Technology, Bhadohi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 117/LKW/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2016-17 Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Indian Institute Of Carpet Income-Tax (Exemption), Technology, Chauri Road, Srn, Lucknow Bhadohi Pan: Aaaji0124M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Akash Agrawal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Department Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Deleted The Addition Of Rs.1,70,77,516/- That Was Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer On Account Of Surplus Above 15% Of Gross Receipts. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “1. Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) Has Erred In Law & Facts By Deleting The Addition Made Of Rs. 1,70,77,516/- On Account Of Amount Surplus Above 15% Without Appreciating The Facts That The Assessee Instead Of Utilizing This Amount Or Crediting This Amount To Income & Expenditure Account, This Sum Was Directly Credited To Balance Sheet. 2. Appellant Craves Leave To Modify/Amend Or Add Any One Or More Grounds Of Appeal.” 2. The Facts Of The Case Are That The Society Is Registered Under Section 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Vide Order Dated 11.12.2006 Of The Ld. Cit, Varanasi. From A Perusal Of The Papers Submitted By The Assessee As Well As The Data Available Online, The Ld. Assessing Officer Found That There Was A Receipt Of A Grant

For Appellant: Sh. Akash Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(6)Section 12A

utilize 85% of the funds, it was required to seek the permission of the Commissioner for the accumulation of the funds under section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act. Since, in this case, the assessee has not sought the permission of the ld. Commissioner for accumulation of funds over

Saint Marks School Siksha Samiti, Agra vs. Jao (Exemptions), Agra

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

ITA 399/AGR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Saint Marks School Siksha Samiti, Vs. Jurisdictional Assessing 41, Saint Peters Colony, Ghatia, Officer-Exemption Hariparvat, Agra Ward, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaeas7764A

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH “SMC”: AGRA BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through virtual hearing) Saint Marks School

Centre for Incubation and Business Acceleration, Verna vs. Centralize Processing Centre, Income Tax Department, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 152/PAN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji26 Nov 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.152/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2024-25 ) Centre For Incubation & Vs. I T O- Exemption, Business Acceleration, Ward-1, Angel Charities, Pundalik Niwas, Angel Ashram, Panaji-403001, Verna, Salcete, Goa. Goa-403722. Pan/Gir No. Aafcc5621B (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Shri.Mahendra Gohel.Ar Revenue By Smt. Rijula Uniyal. Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm:

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

ACIT, Chennai vs. Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1444/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.TFor Respondent: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate
Section 11Section 11(2)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

u/s.11 of Act. It is also seen that the assessee had filed Form No.10 30.10.2019 by seeking accumulation of funds in terms of Section 11(2)(a) of the Act to the extent of Rs.11,22,95,380/-. 4. The Income Tax Department had conducted search and seizure action u/s.132 ... view of the fact that Rule 17 of Income Tax Rules, 1962, which rule prescribes filing of Form No.10 in terms of Section 11(2)(a) of the Act, had prescribed a time limit for filing the Form No.10, even before the statutory amendment to Section 11(2)(c), introducing

St. Francis Xavier Church, Panvel vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Thane

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

ITA 5883/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year : 2024-25 St. Francis Xavier Church Trust, Income Tax Officer, Plot 379/B, Behind Orion Mall Exemption Ward, Thane & S.T. Depot, Vs. Quershi Mansion, Panvel-410206. Gokhale Road, Pan : Aaets4913N Naupada, Thane-400602. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Smt. B. Brahma Vidya Date Of Hearing : 25-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-11-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-Agra, Dated 29-07-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2024-25, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.1. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Erred In Confirming The Denial Of Exemption/Deductions Under Section 11 Of The Act Resorted To By The Centralized Processing Centre [Cpc), Income Tax Department, Bengaluru (The Learned Assessing Officer) While Processing The Return Of Income Under Section 143(1) Of The Act On The Grounds That The Audit Report In Form 10-Bb Was Filed Belatedly, Though With The Return Of Income Which Was Filed Within The Extended Time Limit Under Section 139(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Smt. B. Brahma Vidya
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

cent of the income; 2.1.2 A sum of Rs.9,00,000/- being the amount accumulated or set apart for specified purposes under Section 11(2) of the Act. 2.1.3. A sum of Rs.22,688/- under section 11 read with Section 11(6) of the Act being the amount of capital

Sahara Welfare Foundation, Kolkata vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Circle - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1492/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT

National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 399/RAN/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Nov 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) National University Of Study & Assistant Director Of Research In Law, Ranchi, Income Tax, Vs. Nusrl Campus, Pithoria Road, P.O- C.P.C., Bangaluru. Burku At Nagri, Jharkhand. Pan No. Aaajn 0847 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 10Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143

appellant is registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) and therefore, claimed exemption under Section 11(2) of the Act. The appellant filed income tax return for the A.Y. 2019-20 on 31/10/2019 and disclosed the aggregate receipt ... capital expenditure respectively by the institute. The remaining ₹ 2,54,06,674/- were accumulated and set apart for the purpose as specified under Section 11(2) of the Act by the institute during the year under consideration. The appellant has claimed that the amount set apart

Harmony Foundation, Mumbai vs. ITO Exem Ward 1(3), Mumbai

ITA 5725/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Haridas Bhat, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri A.M.K. Mahadevan, Ld. Sr
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 80G

carried forward to subsequent year for application of accumulated income for those object of charitable activities and claimed exemption as per provision of section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act. 2. Further for claiming Exemption for Accumulation of Income in Excess of Specified Limit [Sec 11(2)], where ... available if return of income is not furnished before due date of filing return as per Sec. 139(1). The provision of section 11(2) is a concession provision to enable a charitable trust to meet the contingency where the fulfillment of any project within its object or objects needs

National Solar Energy Federation of India, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Exemp 2(4), Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 5483/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143Section 194CSection 2(15)Section 250Section 80G

That the Ld. CIT(A) and Assessing Officer have erred in law and facts by disallowing the Appellant's claim for accumulation under section 11(2) on the ground that the purpose mentioned in Form 10 ("Awareness in Solar Power and Events") was vague. This observation is factually and legally ... Officer was of the view that Form 10 filed by the assessee on 30.10.2017 showing accumulation an amount of Rs.33,11,589/- under Section 11(2) of the Act is not eligible for exemption. Further that no specific purpose has been mentioned in Form 10 and it merely states ‘Awareness

Shree Vaish Aggrawal Samaj Chawla Colony Ballabgarh, Ballabgarh, Faridabad vs. CIT Exemptions, Chandigarh

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4204/DEL/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: Na Vs. Cit(Exemption), Shree Vaish Aggrawal Samaj Chawla Colony, Chandigarh Agarsain Bhawan Aggarwal Dharamshala, Near Panchat Bhawan, Chawla Colony, Faridabad Pan: Abcas8302F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Charitra Gupta, Ca Sh. Deepak Garg, Ca Department By Sh. Jitender Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20.11.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm The Assessee Has Filed The Instant Appeal Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) [In Short, The “Cit(E)”], Delhi’S Order Dated 27.05.2025 Having Din & Notice No. Itba/Exm/F/Exm45/2025-26/1076467568(1), Involving Proceedings Under Section 12A(1)(Ac)(Ii) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. Coming To The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Ground Seeking Section 12Ab Registration Herein, We Note From A Perusal Of The Case Record That The Learned Cit(E) Has Declined Its Application Dated 24.12.2024 Vide Following Detailed Discussion: - “4.2 In Response Thereto, The Applicant Has Furnished Its Reply On 05.03.2025. On Perusal Of The Financial Statements Submitted By The Applicant, It Has Been Observed That The Applicant Has Made Investments Of Rs. 8,00,000/- In Btl Impex India Ltd. & Rs. 39,02,760/- In Srs Investment Ltd. The Relevant Extracts Of The Balance Sheets As On 31.03.2022, 31.03.2023 & 31.03.2024 Is Reproduced As Under:

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

10AB for grant of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act is hereby rejected since the applicant is in violation of section 11(2) & 11(5) of Income Tax Act, 1961. This rejection will also supersede any registration granted u/s 12AB by any authority at any earlier time

Om Satya Mehra Public Charitable Trust, Delhi vs. JCIT(A)-1, Noida

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 5824/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: the hearing of appeal." 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that for A.Y. 2016-17 the assessee trust filed its Return of Income on 05.10.2016 declaring nil income. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS. From the computation of income filed during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings the Ld. AO noticed that out of accumulated fund the assessee had given Rs.25,65,004/- as donation to various charitable organization registered under section 12AA. According to AO the d

Section 10Section 11(2)Section 11(3)(d)Section 12ASection 143

fact that the payment was made to specified organisation for specific activities to be undertaken rather than general donation. 3. The Explanation to section 11(2) withdraws exemption to income accumulated u/s 11(2) if the donation is given to any trust institution registered u/s 12AA or to any fund ... various charitable organization registered under section 12AA. According to AO the donation made by the assessee was in contravention of explanation to Section 11(2). Treating the same as deemed income of the trust under Section 11(3)(d) the AO added Rs. 25,65,000/- to the income

Scholars Education Trust of India, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1225/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT
Section 10Section 10(23)(vi)Section 11(5)Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 153(5)Section 2(41)

20.11.2013.The assessee referred that these are investments made u/s11(5). However, section 11(5) becomes applicable when the accumulated money referred in section 11(2)(b) is set aside for the purpose of investments/deposits. The contention of the assessee that the investments have been made as per the objects ... insub-section 5 of section 11 of the Act. The ld. AR has relied upon variousjudgments.We are of the view that as per section 11(2) it is only 75 percent of the income referred to section 11(1)(a)or section 11(1)(b) readwithExplanationto that sub-sectionis

Peoples Mobile Hospital, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Ward 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4116/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Ms. Vasanti Patel
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250

grounds that the Audit Report in Form 10B and Form 10 being statement to be furnished for accumulation of income under section 11(2) of the Act were filed belatedly, though filed before filing the Return of Income which was filed on 30.12.2022 i.e. under section ... appreciate that the time limit prescribed for filing the Audit Report in Form 10B and Form 10 for accumulation of income under section 11(2) of the Act is only declaratory and not mandatory. The lower authorities failed to appreciate that delay in filing the Audit Report is only