← All Phrases

“Section 11(3)(d)”

Section References (mined)Section 11Section 11(3)(d)20 judgments

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)

raise such a plea regarding the applicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014-15 only. 6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our opinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any explanation

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, 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)

another charitable society out of current year's 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

OM SATYA MEHRA PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,DELHI vs. JCIT(A)-1, NOIDA, 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

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 of the assessee. In appeal, the Learned First Appellate Authority affirmed the action

FOUNDATION FOR UNIVERSAL RESPONSIBILITY OF HIS HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA,DELHI vs. ITO, EXEMP. WARD-1(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1798/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1798/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2023-24 बनाम Foundation For Universal Income Tax Officer Responsibility Of His Holiness The Vs. (Exemption), Dalai Lama, Ward 1(1), Core-4A, Ugf, India, New Delhi. Habitat Centre, Upper Ground Floor, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaatf0174E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 11(2)Section 11(3)(c)Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(1)

raise such a plea regarding the applicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014-15 only. 6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our opinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any explanation

SHRI CHINTAMANI PARSHWANATH SHWETAMBAR MURTIPUJAK JAIN SANGH,MUMBAI vs. EXEM. WARD 2(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5038/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J. Kala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Virbhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(2)(a)Section 11(3)Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(1)

raise such a plea regarding the applicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014- 15 only. 6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our opinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any explanation

INCOME-TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)-2(3), MUMBAI, MTNL BUILDING, CUMBALA HILL vs. SETH DAMJI LAXMICHAND JAIN DHARMA STHANAK, CHINCHPOKALI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 4573/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Ravi GanatraFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan (SR. DR)
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 11(3)(d)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

appeal by (i) granting exemption under Section 11(2) of the Act, and (ii) upholding the addition of Rs.1,97,60,600 under Section 11(3)(d) of the Act. The revenue, being dissatisfied with the relief granted, has preferred the present appeal before us. 3. The Ld. DR argued ... allowing exemption under Section 11(2) of the Act. However, in respect of the addition of Rs.1,97,60,600 made under Section 11(3)(d) of the Act, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has given a well-reasoned finding that the accumulated amount was not utilized

THE BOMBAY SOCIETY OF THE FRANCISCAN CLARIST SISTERS OF THE MOST BLESSED SACRAMENT,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEM WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2501/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No.2501/Mum/2025 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2023-2024) The Bombay Society Of V/S. Income Tax Officer, The Franciscan Clarist बिाम Ward 2(4), Mumbai Sisters Of The Most 6Th Floor, Mtnl Tel. Ex. Blessed Sacrament Building, Cumballa Hills, St. Anthony’S Home For The Pedder Road, Mumbai Aged, 51, Chapel Road, 400026 Bandra (West), Mumbai 400050 स्थायी लेखा सुं./जीआइआर सुं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt0738Q Appellant/अपीलाथी .. Respondent/प्रधिवादी धििााररिी की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Prashant Ghumare, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. Dr (Virtually Present) स िवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M.] :- This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Addl/Jcit (A)-2 Delhi, [Cit(A)] Dated 28.02.2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act”] For Assessment Year 2023-2024. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Ghumare, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 115BSection 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

raise such a plea regarding the applicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014-15 only. 6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our opinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any explanation

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST. PAUL,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEM.WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3396/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2023-24 Roman Catholic Church Of St. Income Tax Officer (Exem.), Paul Ward 2(2) St Paul Church, Vs. Dr. Ambedkar Road, Dadar, Mumbai - 400014 (Pan : Aaatr2742L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Haridas Bhat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(2)(a)Section 115BSection 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

raise such a plea regarding the applicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014-15 only. 6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our opinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any explanation

SHRI VASUPUJYA SWAMI MAHARAJ TEMPLE TRUST,PUNE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD 1(2), PUNE

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

ITA 1288/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

raise such a plea regarding the applicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014-15 only. 6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our opinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any explanation

SHRI ISHWARLAL GULABCHAND VARDHAMANTAP AYAMBIL TRUST,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 7(1), PUNE

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

ITA 1287/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

raise such a plea regarding the applicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014-15 only. 6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our opinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any explanation

GMDC SCIENCE & RESEARCH CENTRE,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),, PALANPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is Allowed for Statistical purpose

ITA 958/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, Shri Jimi Patel &For Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Section 11(3)(b)] or accumulation which was credited or paid to any trust or institution (12AA or 10(23C) referred institutions) [Section 11(3)(d)]. Thus, it can be seen that no similar charge was created for accumulation which was not utilised in the period specified in Section 11

GMDC SCIENCE & RESEARCH CENTRE,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),, PALANPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is Allowed for Statistical purpose

ITA 957/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, Shri Jimi Patel &For Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Section 11(3)(b)] or accumulation which was credited or paid to any trust or institution (12AA or 10(23C) referred institutions) [Section 11(3)(d)]. Thus, it can be seen that no similar charge was created for accumulation which was not utilised in the period specified in Section 11

SHREE DADAR DIGAMER JAIN MUMUKSHO MANDAL ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION) WARD 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2446/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2023-24 Shri Dadar Digamber Jain The Cit (Exemption), Mumukshu Mandal, Ward-2(3), 271/293, 271/293, Vs. Mumbai. N.C. Kelkar Road, Opp: Shivaji Park, P.O. Dadar (West) Mumbai-400028. Pan : Aacts8044A (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri A.N. Shah For Revenue : Shri Annavaram Kosuri Date Of Hearing : 11-06-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15-07-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 05-03-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2023-24, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri A.N. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri
Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 11(3)(c)Section 143(1)

raise such a plea regarding the applicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014-15 only. 6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our opinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any explanation

YASHWANTRAO CHAVAN MAHARASHTRA OPEN UNIVERSITY,NASHIK vs. EXEMPTION CIRCLE,A BAD, AURANGABAD

ITA 505/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 11Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

raise such a plea regarding the\napplicability of the aforesaid provisions in AY 2014-15 only.\n6. There is a reference to section 11(3)(d) in the order of AO, which in our\nopinion, is not the correct provision of law. Since the assessee did not give any\nexplanation

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TIRUNELVELI vs. HEMLA TRUST, TIRUNELVELI

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

ITA 138/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri V. Justin, CITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

held that the donation given by the assessee trust is nothing but application of income in terms of section 11(3)(d) of the Act and directed the AO to delete the disallowance of Rs.2,41,00,000/-. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Department

DCIT, CIRCLE- 23(2), NEW DELHI vs. SKYTECH CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 5824/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH (Accountant Member)

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

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 of the assessee. In appeal, the Learned First Appellate Authority affirmed the action

VIJAY VINOD DURAGKAR,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

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

ITA 339/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY

DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SHRI AUROBINDO SOCIO ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE, LUDHINA

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 1375/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)

ITAT was justified in upholding that the amount give to PSWHMM is the income of the appellant- society in terms of Section 11(3)(d) by upholding that the status of the recipient-society is immaterial for the purposes of application of section ll(3)(d), when the departmental circular

SIR AUROBINDO SOCIO ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 1348/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)

ITAT was justified in upholding that the amount give to PSWHMM is the income of the appellant- society in terms of Section 11(3)(d) by upholding that the status of the recipient-society is immaterial for the purposes of application of section ll(3)(d), when the departmental circular

SANGANERIA FOUNDATIONS FOR HEALTH & EDUCATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, EXEMPTION , NEW DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 703/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usa.Yr. : 2017-18 Sanganeria Foundations For Vs. Cit, Exemption Health & Education, New Delhi 304, Avg Bhawan, M-3, Ward Exemption 2(1), Connaught Circus, Civic Centre, New Delhi – 110 001 New Delhi – 110 002 (Pan: Aadts8978E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir Singh, CIT-DR
Section 11(2)Section 11(3)(d)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

aforesaid submissions, the CIT(Exemption) held that as per Explanation to section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with section 11(3)(d) of the Act, donations given out of accumulated funds u/s. 11(2) of the Act of earlier previous years are not allowable as application ... amount was payment was paid to the Shree Raghunath Vidyalaya. He further submitted that explanation to Section 11(2) of the Act and Section 11(3)(d) of the Act do not carve out any exception for cases, where donation has been made by a Trust to another Trust