← All Phrases

“Section 13(1)(c)”

Section References (mined)Section 13Section 13(1)(c)445 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 13(1)(c) is CIT v. Samsung Electronics Ltd. (345 ITR 494), cited in 461 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 13(1)(c)

CIT v. Samsung Electronics Ltd.
345 ITR 494 · 2012 · High Court
461
citing judgments

Payments by Indian residents to non-resident foreign software suppliers for software are considered royalty, constituting income deemed to accrue in India under section 9(1)(v), thereby requiring tax deduction at source under section 195.

DIT v. Infrasoft Ltd.
39 Taxmann.com 88 · 2013 · High Court
269
citing judgments

Payments for the use of copyrighted software, without the transfer of any rights in the underlying copyright itself, do not constitute 'royalty' under the Income-tax Act or tax treaties. Such payments are often treated as business income, taxable only if a permanent establishment exists.

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT
381 ITR 117 · 2016 · High Court
220
citing judgments

The Bright Line Test (BLT) is not a recognized method under the Income-tax Act and Rules for benchmarking advertising, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenses or for determining the existence of an international transaction or its Arm's Length Price. The Revenue must first establish the existence and price of an international transaction before seeking an ALP adjustment.

Motorola Inc. v. Dy. CIT
95 ITD 269 · 2005 · High Court
213
citing judgments

Revenue must demonstrate the existence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) of a foreign enterprise in India, including establishing that transactions underlying a Dependent Agent PE were not at arm's length. Income from the sale of goods is not taxable in India if title and risk in the goods pass outside India.

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.

CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona
402 ITR 441 · 2018 · Supreme Court
187
citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable as a deduction even if the expenditure for acquiring the capital asset was treated as application of income for charitable purposes. This does not constitute a double benefit.

Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT
348 ITR 344 · 2012 · High Court
164
citing judgments

The Kerala High Court held that charitable institutions claiming exemption under Section 11 are not entitled to claim depreciation on assets used for charitable purposes, taking a view contrary to most other High Courts.

Judgments citing Section 13(1)(c)

Clg Universal Foundation, Jodhpur vs. CIT(Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, ITAs 192 & 280/Jodh/2024 are allowed and ITA

ITA 192/JODH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(c)Section 2(15)Section 8Section 80G(5)

finding regarding the charitable objects or the identity of the trust. Therefore, rejection of registration merely on the ground of alleged violations under Section 13(1)(c) was wholly unjustified. The Ld. AR invited our attention to copy of rent agreement, details of amount spent on various activities and Audited ... that the assessee had not carried out genuine charitable activities and that the alleged transactions amounted to siphoning of funds in violation of Section 13(1)(c) of the Act. It is a settled proposition of law that at the stage of granting registration under Section 12AB, the scope

Whole Sale Cloth Merchant Association, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle Kota, Kota

ITA 962/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016
For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

held that cancellation of registration u/s 12A cannot be done. However Hon'ble ITAT has not examined the violation of section 13(1)(c) therefore, denial of exemption u/s 11 is found to be justified by the AO. The appellant has relied upon the case of CIT Vis State Urban ... exemption to the assessee u/s 11 of the Act. Further, Section 13 has the title 'Section 11 not to apply in certain cases'. Section 13(1)(c) says that if any part of income or any property of the trust is used or applied directly or indirectly for the benefit

Whole Sale Cloth Merchant Association, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle Kota, Kota

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

ITA 961/JPR/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015
For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

held that cancellation of registration u/s 12A cannot be done. However Hon'ble ITAT has not examined the violation of section 13(1)(c) therefore, denial of exemption u/s 11 is found to be justified by the AO. The appellant has relied upon the case of CIT Vis State Urban ... exemption to the assessee u/s 11 of the Act. Further, Section 13 has the title 'Section 11 not to apply in certain cases’. Section 13(1)(c) says that if any part of income or any property of the trust is used or applied directly or indirectly for the benefit

Aryans Educational and Charitable Trust Regd, Mohali vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 1136/CHANDI/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1136/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2025-26 Aryans Educational & The Cit (Exemptions), Charitable Trust, Regd.Mohali Vs Chandigarh, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate, # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(ii)Section 13(3)

namely 2014-15 and 2015-16. Armed with these facts on their cumulative setting, AO was of the view that assessee has violated Section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(3) of the Income Tax Act. He taxed the surplus over the expenditure and observed ... held that there was no fault committed by the assessee while A.Y.2025-26 4 accepting the donations. Hence, it is not hit by Section 13(1)(c) as well as 13(1)(d) of the Act. The Tribunal has directed the AO to grant benefit of Section

Rohilkhand Educational Charitable Trust, Bareilly vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Bareilly

ITA 182/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

prohibited person arose, the trust will lose exemption in respect of the entire income. Since the trust had violated the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act, it was not entitled to exemption under section 11 of the Act on the entire surplus of the assessee amounting ... which the trustees of the assessee trust had substantial interest. Thus, it fell into section 13(2)(h) and was a violation of section 13(1)(c). In the circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in disallowing Rs.20,00,00,000/- as application of income on this account

Rohilkhand Educational Charitable Trust, Bareilly vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Bareilly

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 181/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.181 & 182/Lkw/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational Vs. Dcit, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly Pan: Aaatr6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. S.H. Usmani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: [ These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Lucknow Dated 19.03.2024 & 22.03.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19, Dismissing The Appeals Of The Assessee Against Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “(1).That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering The Fact That In The Alleged Assessment Order, The Columns Of Name Of Assessee, Pan, Asst Year, Date Of Assessment & Section Under Which Passed, Are Blank. (2)That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating The Demand As Valid Which Was Not Computed On The Basis Of Orderthat May Not Be Termed To Be An Order Under Section 143(3). (3) That A Demand Of Tax As Computed In The Computation Sheet Is Without Jurisdiction Void-Ab-Inito & Is Liable To Be Annulled. (4) That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 736591857/-Comprising  Corpus Donation Aggregating To Rs 7,68,95,000/-, A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

prohibited person arose, the trust will lose exemption in respect of the entire income. Since the trust had violated the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act, it was not entitled to exemption under section 11 of the Act on the entire surplus of the assessee amounting ... which the trustees of the assessee trust had substantial interest. Thus, it fell into section 13(2)(h) and was a violation of section 13(1)(c). In the circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in disallowing Rs. 20,00,00,000/- as application of income on this account

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

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण न्यायपीठ, म ुंबई| IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH

Dr Kondabolu Basavapunaiah & Dr Lakshmi Prasad Trust, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption Ward), Guntur

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 56/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 250

failed to consider that, based on the facts and circumstances of the case, there was no violation of the provisions of section 13(1)(c) r-w.s. 13(2)(f) of the IT Act, and thus, the denial of the exemption U/s. 11 was unwarranted ... factually incorrect. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the AO finding that there was a violation of the provisions of Section 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(2)(f) of the IT Act, thereby incorrectly treating the assessee as an Association of Persons (AOP) and subjecting

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)

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

Mumbra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Thane vs. ITO (Exemption) Thane, Dy. CIT (Central Circle) - 1 Thane, Thane

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 379/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

There are instances of suppression of receipts which has been admitted by the trustees of the appellant trust iv. There are violations of section 13(1)(c) of the Act because the cash taken out from the trust was used by trustees for their personal purposes ... held that the trustees of the trust inflated the expenses and cash was withdrawn for their personal use. Therefore, the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act have also been violated. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 11,88,565/- on account of surplus as per “income and expenditure

Mumbra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Thane vs. ITO (Exemptions), Thane, Dy. CIT (Central Circle) - 1

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 378/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

There are instances of suppression of receipts which has been admitted by the trustees of the appellant trust iv. There are violations of section 13(1)(c) of the Act because the cash taken out from the trust was used by trustees for their personal purposes ... held that the trustees of the trust inflated the expenses and cash was withdrawn for their personal use. Therefore, the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act have also been violated. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 11,88,565/- on account of surplus as per “income and expenditure

Mumbra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Thane vs. ITO (Exemptions) - Thane, Dy. CIT (Central Circle) - 1, Thane

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 377/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

There are instances of suppression of receipts which has been admitted by the trustees of the appellant trust iv. There are violations of section 13(1)(c) of the Act because the cash taken out from the trust was used by trustees for their personal purposes ... held that the trustees of the trust inflated the expenses and cash was withdrawn for their personal use. Therefore, the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act have also been violated. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 11,88,565/- on account of surplus as per “income and expenditure

Mumbra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Thane vs. ITO (Exemption) - Thane, Dy. CIT (Central Circle) - 1, Thane

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are

ITA 376/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

There are instances of suppression of receipts which has been admitted by the trustees of the appellant trust iv. There are violations of section 13(1)(c) of the Act because the cash taken out from the trust was used by trustees for their personal purposes. आयकर अपीलीय अधिकार INCOME ... held that the trustees of the trust inflated the expenses and cash was withdrawn for their personal use. Therefore, the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act have also been violated. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 11,88,565/- on account of surplus as per "income and expenditure

Mumbra Shikhshan Prasarak Mandal, Thane vs. ITO (Exemptions) - Thane, Dy. CIT (Central Circle) - 1, Thane

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are

ITA 375/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

There are instances of suppression of receipts which has been admitted by the trustees of the appellant trust iv. There are violations of section 13(1)(c) of the Act because the cash taken out from the trust was used by trustees for their personal purposes. आयकर अपीलीय अधिकर INCOME ... held that the trustees of the trust inflated the expenses and cash was withdrawn for their personal use. Therefore, the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act have also been violated. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 11,88,565/- on account of surplus as per "income and expenditure

Mumbra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Thane vs. ITO (Exemptions) - Thane, Dy. CIT (Central Circle) - 1, Thane

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 374/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

There are instances of suppression of receipts which has been admitted by the trustees of the appellant trust iv. There are violations of section 13(1)(c) of the Act because the cash taken out from the trust was used by trustees for their personal purposes ... held that the trustees of the trust inflated the expenses and cash was withdrawn for their personal use. Therefore, the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act have also been violated. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 11,88,565/- on account of surplus as per “income and expenditure

Icg-Iisu Alumnae Association-Bandhan, Jaipur vs. CIT (Exemption), Jaipur

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

ITA 923/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR (Thru:V.C.)
Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 254

thus being rejected on following grounds:- Assesee trust meant for the benefit of its members and not for  public at large & violation of section 13(1)(c) & 12AA.  Business/Commercial activities Non genuineness of activities”  ii. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(E) the Assessee Appellant is again ... same reasons as under:-  Assesee trust meant for the benefit of its members and not for public at large & violation of section 13(1)(c) & 12AA.  Business/Commercial activities  Non genuineness of activities The Assessee is charitable in nature which aspect is not disputed by ld. CIT(E). The grievance

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(4), Bengaluru vs. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar

ITA 903/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

M/S. Sri. Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes(Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1561/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

material on record, the Id. CIT(A) upheld the AO’s finding that the assessee Trust had received capitation fees in violation of section 13(1)(c) of the Act and the Karnataka Education Institution (Prohibition of Capitation Fees) Act, 1984. 21.1 The Id. CIT(A) further held that ... argued that this finding amounts to a direct admission of a violation of the objectives of a charitable trust and of section 13(1)(c) of the Act. 22.1 The learned DR pointed out that section 13(1)(c) of the Act specifically denies the benefit of section

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

ITA 1559/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru vs. Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes, Kolar

ITA 1549/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL