← All Phrases

“Section 10(25)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(25)56 judgments

PAWAI TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5106/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanpawai Trust , Vs. Dcit B-60-61 C/O Bajaj Auto Ltd. Cirlce 49(1) Naraina Industrial Area Phase Ii Delhi New Delhi (Pan: Aaatp0445J)

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Ben Patel, Adv &For Respondent: Sh. Ankush Kalra, Sr DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 243CSection 243c

where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is receivable

VIHAR TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 4374/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2023-24
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 167BSection 250

behalf of a recognized\nPage 5\n\nITA No.4372-4374/Del/2025\n\nprovident fund, approved superannuation fund and\napproved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of\nthe Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged\nto tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is\nreceivable

VIHAR TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 4373/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2022-23
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 167BSection 250

income\nreceived by the trustees on behalf of a recognized\n\nprovident fund, approved superannuation fund and\napproved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of\nthe Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged\nto tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is\nreceivable

VIHAR TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 4372/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2021-22
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 167BSection 250

behalf of a recognized\nPage 5\n\nITA No.4372-4374/Del/2025\n\nprovident fund, approved superannuation fund and\napproved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of\nthe Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged\nto tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is\nreceivable

NARMADA TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2531/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vasantiben Patel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)

where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income –Tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is receivable

NARMADA TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2530/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vasantiben Patel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)

where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income –Tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is receivable

VINDHYA TRUST,DELHI vs. DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2122/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 250

where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income- tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise So far as cases where income is receivable

VINDHYA TRUST,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2121/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 250

where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income- tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise So far as cases where income is receivable

NARMADA TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3034/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2023-24 Narmada Trust B-60/61 C/O Vs. Income Tax Officer Circle Bajaj Auto Limited Naraina, 25 (1) Industrial Area Phase-Ii New Delhi Mitraon Naraina Industrial Estate South West Delhi 110028 New Delhi Pan No. Aaatn0321K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 111ASection 12Section 143(1)

where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income –Tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is receivable

TATA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED PROVIDENT FUND,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -41(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3587/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankartata International Limited V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Provident Fund बनाम 41(1)(5), Room No. 422, 4Th 24Th Floor, Vios Tower, New Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Cuffe Parade, Sewri-Chembur Bandra Kurla Complex, Road, Near Imax Dome, Bandra (East), Mumbai – Wadala, Antophill, Mumbai – 400051, Maharashtra 400037, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacft2518G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanjia/w Ms. Hetal Sangani &For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)
Section 10(25)Section 10(25)(ii)Section 143(1)

TII/251(7)79-80 dated 5.6.1980, whereby income earned by the appellant (being a recognized Provident Fund Trust) is entirely exempt per section 10(25)(ii) of the Act. (b) denying exemption to the appellant as per section 10(25)(ii) of the Act merely on the basis of filing ... wherein similar issue was discussed and exemption as per section 10(25)(ii) of the Act was granted determining income at Rs. NIL. 3. In this case, the assessee, a recognized Provident Fund whose income is exempt u/s 10(25) (ii) of the Act wrongly filed the Return of Income

ULTRA CORPOTECH P L EMPLOYEE GROUP GRATUITY CUM LIFE ASSURANCE SCHEME,PUNE vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, WARD-1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1667/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 10Section 10(25)Section 10(25)(iv)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

appreciated that filing of Form 108 is not a requirement to claim exemption u/s 10(25)(iv). 3. Appellant contends that exemption u/s section 10(25)(iv) of the ITA, 1961 should be granted for AY 2023-24, considering the provision of section 10(25 ... approval has been granted from 23.03.2022 by ld. PCIT (Central), Pune. Therefore, the case of the assessee clearly falls in the provisions of section 10(25(iv) of the Act which provides that “any income received by the trustees on behalf of an approved gratuity fund” is exempt from

JASMINA TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed with event to follow accordingly

ITA 2211/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 167(1)Section 167BSection 234C

where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is receivable

JASMINA TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

Accordingly.'\nIn the light of the aforesaid, we are of the considered view that the ground\ncommon in all the years deserves to be sustained. Resultantly the appeals are\nallowed with event to fol...

ITA 2210/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2022-23
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 167(1)Section 167BSection 234C

where income received by the trustees on behalf of\na recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved\ngratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the\nquestion of their being charged to tax does not arise. So far as cases where\nincome is receivable

JASMINA TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

Accordingly.'\nIn the light of the aforesaid, we are of the considered view that the ground\ncommon in all the years deserves to be sustained. Resultantly the appeals are\nallowed with event to fol...

ITA 2209/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2021-22
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 167(1)Section 167BSection 234C

where income received by the trustees on behalf of\na recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved\ngratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the\nquestion of their being charged to tax does not arise. So far as cases where\nincome is receivable

TULSI TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1410/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwaltulsi Trust Dy. Cit, B-60/61, C/O Bajaj Auto Circle-49(1), Limited, Naraina Industrial Vs. New Delhi. Area Phase-Ii, New Delhi-110028 Pan-Aaatt0503H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mahender Gohel, Ar (Virtual) Department By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2025 O R D E R [ Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Addl./ Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Hyderabad [Cit(A) In Short], Dated 26.03.2025 In Appeal No. Addl. / Jcit-(A) - 4 Hyderabad/10061/2022-23 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Short) For Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Trust & Filed Its Return Of Income On 21.07.2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.5,67,53,750/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) By The Cpc Tulsi Trust Vs. Dcit Wherein The Assessee Was Charged Tax At A Flat Rate Of 30% & Surcharge As Applicable As Against The Normal Rate Of Tax As Per The Slab Provided In The Act Paid By The Assessee. Against The Said Order, The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) Who Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee.

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 250

where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise So far as cases where income is receivable

FIS SOLUTIONS (INDIA) GRATUITY TRUST,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

ITA 542/PUN/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A VazeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 10(25)(iv)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234B

erred in computing tax on gross revenue of ₹96,07,736. The appellant is an approved gratuity fund trust, and as per Section 10(25)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, all income received on behalf of the approved gratuity fund is exempt from tax. Levy of Interest u/s 234B ... case. He admitted that the assessee inadvertently used section 4 ITA No.542/PUN/2025, AY 2013-14 10(23C) in drop-down menu as section 10(25) was not available (in drop-down menu) while filing ITR 7. But this mistake is not fatal to deny the exemption, which is otherwise available

LUDLOW JUTE COMPANY LIMITED PROVIDENT FUND,KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

ITA 2434/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(25)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250

computation of total income, entire income received was claimed exempt, in view of the provisions of section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3.2 In the order u/s 143(1), the A.O. has considered the entire income earned by the appellant during the Assessment year under consideration ... Total Income as regards to the contention of the assessee that, the said income was exempt in view of the provisions of section 10(25) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and raised a Tax demand of Rs. 2,25,01,090 though it/-.” 3. Brief facts of the case

GUJARAT INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT CORPORATION LIMITED EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 584/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Maulik Kansara, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(25)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(38)Section 57

passed CPC. The assessee contended during appellate proceedings before CIT(Appeals) that its income was actually exempt under alternative provisions as well, namely Sections 10(25) or 10(38) read with Section 2(38) of the Act, even if exemption under Section 10(23AAA) was not allowable. The CIT(Appeals ... return of income, we are of the considered view that the CIT(Appeals) erred in not examining the alternate claim of exemption under Sections 10(25) or 10(38) read with Section 2(38) of the Act. The CIT(Appeals), while upholding the procedural legality of the adjustment made under

ROSE TRUST,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-49(1), DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3036/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 167BSection 234C

recognized provident fund, approved superannuation fund and 6 A.Y. 2021-22 Rose Trust v. DCIT approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged to tax does not arise. So far as cases where income is receivable

GUNNEBO INDIA EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 1(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4193/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2016-17 Gunnebo India Employees Income Tax Officer, Provident Fund, Ward-1(1), Unit No.2, 1St Floor, Vs. Thane-400601. Akruti Smc, Next To Msrtc Depot, Lbs Marg, Khopat, Thane (W), Mumbai-400601. Pan : Aaaas5921K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms. Hemlata Bhungare For Revenue : Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-07-2025 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)-8, Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 28-02-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 54 Days In Filing The Appeal As Pointed Out By The Registry. After Hearing Both The Parties & Taking Into Consideration The Affidavit Placed On Record Seeking Condonation Of Delay, We Find That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay

For Appellant: Ms. Hemlata BhungareFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr.DR
Section 10(25)Section 143(3)

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

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3