“Section 13(1)(c)(ii)”

Section References (mined)Section 13Section 13(1)(c)(ii)71 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 13(1)(c)(ii) is GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption) (360 ITR 138), cited in 51 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 13(1)(c)(ii)

GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption)

360 ITR 138 · 2014 · High Court

citing judgments

Charging fees, even when having regard to the economic status of beneficiaries, is permissible for the sustenance of charitable activities, provided it is necessary for operation and running expenses and does not amount to carrying on trade or commerce. This applies even after the introduction of the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

CIT v. Gujrati Samaj

349 ITR 559 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

Expenditure incurred by a charitable trust in an earlier year can be set off against income of the current year as application of income. Excess expenditure by a trust can be set off against its income.

Tranvancore Cements Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

305 ITR 170 · 2008 · High Court

citing judgments

Once an Assessing Officer forms a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and issues a notice under section 148, they can assess or reassess income related to other issues not originally included in the reasons recorded.

Surat City Gymkhana v. Dy.CIT

254 ITR 733 · 2002 · High Court

citing judgments

The burden of proof lies on the Assessing Officer (AO) to establish that a trust or charitable institution is hit by the provisions of Section 13. General allegations or mere transactions with interested persons are insufficient unless concrete benefit is proven.

DIT(E) v. Charanjiv Charitable Trust

43 Taxmann.com 300 · 2014 · High Court

citing judgments

A charitable trust can claim depreciation on a capital asset even if its cost was treated as application of income for charitable purposes. Allowing depreciation does not constitute double allowance.

Deputy Director of Income Tax v. All India Football Federation

62 Taxmann.com 362 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

The proviso to section 2(15) should not be invoked to deny exemption to a sports organization if its activities are not predominantly in the nature of trade, commerce, or business.

Action for Welfare and Awakening in Rural Environment (AWARE) v. DICT

263 ITR 13 · 2003 · High Court

citing judgments

Violating provisions of Section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with Section 13(2)(b) disentitles an assessee from claiming exemption, as the funds of the assessee were diverted and misutilized.

Canara Bank Golden Jubilee Staff Welfare Fund v. DCIT

308 ITR 202 · 2009 · High Court

citing judgments

The income of a society for mutual benefits of its members is exempt from tax, as demonstrated in this case concerning a cooperative bank.

Judgments citing Section 13(1)(c)(ii)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax- Central-Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Jaymahakali Shikshan Sanstha, Wardha

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 335/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 69A

exemption of section 11 of IT. Act merely on the addition of Rs.1,80,000/-received on rent, when the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3). states that if any part of income or any property of the trust is applied directly or indirectly ... ground no.2, raised by the Revenue relates to the disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing

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)

case in invoking the provision of section 12AA(3) of the Act on the basis of his finding that the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) are applicable on the assessee. 4. Without prejudice to grounds above, order of cancellation of registration is a quasi-judicial order, having serious ... Central) on the basis of his finding that the provisions of section 11 and section 13(1)(c)(ii) are applicable on the assessee. The ld AR submitted that a onetime violation due to ignorance and that too for a very short duration cannot be a sole ground for cancellation

Saraswati Mukund Education Society, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption, Thane, Mumbai

ITA 3316/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar

Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 250

payment of car hire charged made to Shri Deepak More and (b) making addition of INR.17,98,518/- by invoking contained in Section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with Section 13(3)(cc) of the Act and withdrawing the benefit exemption under section 11 of the Act in respect

DCIT Circle 1 (E) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Adarsh Foundation, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1216/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

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

trust. Furthermore, in DCIT vs. Adarsh Foundation Asst.Year –2017-18 - 5– the earlier orders it was held that provisions of Section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act were not applicable as no part of the charitable income was used for the benefit of any specific individuals, as no such ... been dealt with in favour of the assessee in prior years. The CIT(A) had earlier ruled that the provisions of Sections 13(1)(c)(ii), 13(2)(b), 13(2)(d), and 13(2)(g) were not violated by the assessee, and thus, the AO’s decision to assess

Tejas C. Joshi, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 712/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 64

that assessee had deposited money with a company which was found to be specified person of assessee, thus, assessee was hit by section 13(1)(c)(ii) and section 13(1)(d) and money was to be taxed separately at maximum marginal rate in terms of proviso to section ... Page No 6 Tejas C. Joshi. vs. ITO additions on account of amount deposited by assessee with specified person in contravention to section 13(1)(c)(ii) and 13(1)(d) was deleted by Commissioner (Appeals), further addition made by Assessing Officer under section 69A was also to be Deleted

Guru Krishnanand Charitable Trust, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesses in ITA Nos

ITA 129/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.127, 128 & 129/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-2014) Guru Krishnanand Charitable Trust, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 157, P.M. Swamy Colony, Income Tax, 5Th Street, Central Circle 1, Coimbatore 641 002. Coimbatore [Pan: Aaatg 4923A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Irs, Addl. Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, IRS, Addl. CIT

Section 12ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271F

withdrawn for benefit of trustees. The ld.CIT(A) held that the AO has rightly held that the appellant has violated provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) by applying funds of the trust for the benefit of persons mentioned u/s.13(3)(cc) i.e. trustees. However, since cash deposits in bank

Guru Krishnanand Charitable, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1 Cbe, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesses in ITA Nos

ITA 128/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, IRS, Addl. CIT

Section 12ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271F

Guru Krishnanand Charitable Trust, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesses in ITA Nos

ITA 127/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, IRS, Addl. CIT

Section 12ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271F

Ravindra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption, Thane

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

ITA 3511/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanravindra Shikshan Prasarak Vs. Ito Ward Exemption, Mandal, Thane 5/8 Kartik Sadan Saverkar Road, Room No. 208, 2Nd Floor, Opp-Gopal Nagar, Dombivli, Quereshi Mansion, Gokhale Maharashtra – 421 201 Road, Naupada, Thane (West), Pan: Aabtr2696A Near Teen Hath Naka, Thane, Maharashtra – 400 602

Section 11(1)(a)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(c)Section 143(2)Section 250

noticed that an excess salary/remuneration of Rs. 2,29,500/- has been given to trustee Shri Omkar Karkare in violation of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act. Thus, the AO made the addition of Rs. 18,58,500/- on account of salary /remuneration paid to the trustees. Accordingly ... financial assistance provided to the trustees for education of the trustees by treating it to be a scholarship by invoking provisions of section 13(1)(c) (ii) and 13(2) (c) which may kindly be deleted. Ravindra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal 6. The appellant would like to Rs Nil leave

Lakhmi Chand Yadav, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue

ITA 516/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 516/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Lakhmi Chand Yadav, Vs Income Tax Officer, Village Mirzapur Hardet Haveli Ward-1(4), Mujehri, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaepy4744P Assessee By : Sh. M. K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12, Arises Against The Order Of Cit(A), Faridabad Dated 28.11.2019 In Case No. 10339/2018-19 In Proceedings U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. M. K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr

Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260A

seen that the said company is a specified person of the assessee. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee is hit by Section 13(1)(c)(ii) and Section 13(1)(d) of the Act., for such reason the assessment was reopened under Section 147 of the Act by issuance

Saraswati Mukund Education Society, Mumbai vs. ITO Exemption, Thane

ITA 4010/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh V. KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav

Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(cc)Section 144BSection 147Section 250

payment of car hire charged made to Shri Deepak More and (b) making addition of INR.7,26,352/- by invoking contained in Section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with Section 13(3)(cc) of the Act and withdrawing the benefit exemption under section 11 of the Act in respect

Raath Vidyapeeth, Alwar vs. ITO (Exmp.), Ward-Alwar, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is partly allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 338/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 251

towards security money and balance Rs.5,16,000/- as violation of section 11(5) of the Act so as to attract section 13(1)(c)(ii) r.w.s. 13(2)(g) & 13(2)(h) of the Act. Accordingly addition of Rs.5,16,000/- was made. 3. Similarly assessee advanced Rs.20 lacs ... Para c of the order held it to be violation of section 11(5) of the Act so as to attract section 13(1)(c)(ii) r.w.s. 13(2)(g) & 13(2)(h) of the Act. 6 RAATH VIDYAPEETH VS ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-ALWAR Accordingly addition of Rs.10 lacs

Sureshkumar Jethanand Rawlani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 17(3)(4), Mumbai

ITA 1054/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R. &

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246Section 4Section 5Section 56(2)(vii)Section 80

Sureshkumar Jethanand Rawlani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 17(3)(4), Mumbai

ITA 1053/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R. &

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246Section 4Section 5Section 56(2)(vii)Section 80

Health Foundation & Research Centre, Dahod vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Exemption, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 516/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.516/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Health Foundation & The Acit बनाम/ Research Centre Circle-2 (Exemption) Gf Post Box No.156 Ahmedabad-380 015 V/S. Sheth Shri Girdharlal Marg Raliyati Road, Dahold – 389 151 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaath 0867 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) ….. "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 08/05/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short], Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 19/12/2018 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Health Foundation & Research Centre Vs. Acit Asst. Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR

Section 11Section 13(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

adjudicating ground relating to validity of assessment without issuing any show cause regarding applicability of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) when no adverse inference is warranted under the said provision. Health Foundation & Research Centre vs. ACIT Asst. Year : 2011-12 4 5. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAX erred ... afforded a fair opportunity to present its case and that the issues raised, including the validity of reassessment and the applicability of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act, are thoroughly examined. 4.6. In light of the above findings, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Global Institute of Technology Society, Jaipur Rajasthan

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 175/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, (Addl.CIT)

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147

which any of the persons referred to in clauses (a), (b), (c), (cc) and (d) has a substantial interest. The thrust of section 13(1)(c)(ii) is that income shall not be exempt u/s 11 in the case where any part of income or property of the trust

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Jyoti Vidyapeeth Trust, Jaipur

16. As a result, finding no merit in the appeal filed by the department, the same is hereby dismissed

ITA 707/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 12ASection 143(3)

such Learned 7 ITA No. 707/JPR/2023 & CO No. 10/JPR/2023 M/s Jyoti Vidyapeeth Trust Assessing officer was justified in applying the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) and section 13(2)(c) of the Act as in force during the relevant period, and thereby disallowing the claim in entirety ... taxman 327, by Hon’ble Kerala High Court. Learned DR for the department has referred to the provisions of Section 11, Section 13(1)(c)(ii) and Section 13(2)(c) of the Act. He has also referred to the amendment made by the legislature to sub- clause

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. The Theosophical Society, Chennai

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 624/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 624/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer The Theosophical Society, (Exemptions), V. 1, Adyar, Ward -4, Chennai – 600 020. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatt-0479-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit : Ms. G. Vardini Karthik, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओरसे/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.06.2024

For Appellant: Shri. N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(b)Section 143(3)

have made donations to the society had stayed in lodging facilities of the society by paying nominal maintenance charges. So provisions of Section 13(1)(c)(ii) was invoked on the ground that the guest house of the society has been let out to interested :-4-: ITA. No: 624/Chny/2024 persons

M A J Foundation, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2, (Exemption), Bangalore

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

ITA 988/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri G. Venkatesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Srinath S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 11Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 250

circumstances of the Appellant's case. 2. The learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in confirming the invoking of the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act and thereby denying the exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case ... learned CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the invoking of the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act by merely stating that the contention of the Assessing Officer has not been challenged in satisfactory manner on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The learned

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Jaya Educational Trust, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1552/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1552/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. The Dcit, Jaya Educational Trust, Chennai. No.8, Krishnapuram, Ii Main Road, Thiruninravur, Thiruvallur-602 024. [Pan:Aaatj 0369 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(cc)Section 13(2)(a)Section 13(2)(cc)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 263

benefit of persons specified in section 13(3) of the Act. The AO, further observed that as per the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act, if any part of income or any property of the trust is used or applied directly or indirectly for the benefit