“Section 10(23)(c)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(23)(c)27 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 10(23)(c) is CIT v. Bar Council of Maharashtra (130 ITR 28), cited in 74 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 10(23)(c)

CIT v. Bar Council of Maharashtra

130 ITR 28 · 1981 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

An organization’s purpose qualifies as 'general public utility' under section 2(15) if its primary objective is charitable, even if it incidentally benefits a specific group or generates some profit, provided the dominant motive is not profit-making. Such an entity is eligible for exemptions under the Act.

Vivek Jain v. ACIT

337 ITR 74 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

If a property is not let out at all, notional income must be computed, and the benefit of section 23(1)(c) (vacancy allowance) cannot be extended. However, section 23(1)(c) can apply to properties let out for two or more years that remain vacant for the entire previous year.

CIT v. Anderson Marine & Sons (P.) Ltd.

266 ITR 694 · 2004 · High Court

citing judgments

Revisional jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be exercised beyond a period of two years from the date of the order sought to be revised. This applies to orders passed under section 143(1) and issues not considered during reassessment proceedings under section 143(3)/147.

Judgments citing Section 10(23)(c)

National Institute of Bank Management, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, National Faceless Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 757/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm National Institute Of Bank Assessing Officer, Management, National Faceless S-14, Pemino, Altamount Vs. Assessment Centre, Delhi Road, Mumbai-400 026 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatnp0040P Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Exemption) 2(1) National Institute Of Bank Room No.608, Management, 6Th Floor S-14, Pemino, Altamount Vs. Mtnl Building, Road, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400 026 Mumbai-400 026

For Appellant: Shri S. AnanthanFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Gaikwad, DR

Section 10Section 10(23)(c)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 144BSection 2

under Section 11 of the Act was also allowed. The learned CIT (A) dismissed the alternative claim of the assessee for exemption under Section 10(23)(c) of the Act as there was no approval submitted in case of the assessee. Therefore, the appellate order passed on 15th February ... exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Act. However, before us the assessee has claimed that there is an approval available under Section 10(23)(C)(IV) of the Act with the assessee. We direct the learned Assessing Officer to examine the same if same is subsisting then the issue

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. National Institute of Bank Management, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 1192/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S. AnanthanFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Gaikwad, DR

Section 10Section 10(23)(c)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 144BSection 2

Confrere Educational Society, Noida vs. ITO (Exemption), Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4464/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 12ASection 250Section 251Section 56

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV

M/S Chouhan Education Society, Bhopal vs. The ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

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

ITA 193/IND/2009[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Mar 2023AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Chouhan Education Acit 1(1) Society Bhopal Vs. E-8, Trilanga, Shahpura, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaatc 551 Q Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Shri Vijay Bansal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.03.2023

Section 10Section 10(23)(C)Section 10(23)(iiiad)Section 11Section 12ASection 148

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

Shri Ram Education & Graminvikas Charitable Trust, Valsad vs. Income Tax Officer ( Exemption Ward), Surat

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 213/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainishri Ram Education & I.T.O., (Exemption Ward) Graminvikas Charitable Trust, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Jauagauri Park, Hathikhana, Majura Gate, Dharampur, Surat. Valsad-396050. Pan No. Aalts 324 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 10(23)(C)Section 11aSection 12ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 254(1)

Officer also recorded that the assessee has not furnished any information as to whether the assessee having registration under Section 12AA or under Section 10(23)(C) of the Act for claiming exemption under Section 11and 12 of the Act. Bank statement received from the banker of assessee, in response

Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belgaum vs. CIT, Bangalore

ITA 8/BANG/2016[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri.Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : N.A. Visvesvaraya Technological University, The Commissioner Of Jnana Ganga Campus, Vs. Income-Tax (Exemptions), Belagavi. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaajv 0064 F Appellant Respondent : Shri. M.V. Seshachala, Sr. Standing Assessee By Counsel & Shri Shiva Prasad Reddy, I.T.P Revenue By : Shri Dilip, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.11.2022 O R D E R Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of Order Dated 28/01/2021, Passed By Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court In Ita No.825/2018. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2. In The First Round Of Appeal The Assessee Raised Following Grounds Before This Tribunal Against Order Passed By The Ld.Cit(E), Dated 08/12/2015: 1. The Impugned Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income- Tax (Exemptions), Bengaluru [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(E)] Under Section 12A Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The I-T Act), To The Extent It Is Not Retrospective In Effect, Is Arbitrary, Erroneous, Unreasonable & Opposed To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & The Law.

For Respondent: Shri. M.V. Seshachala, Sr. Standing

Section 10(23)(C)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(a)Section 80G

fact that assessee was granted recognition under section 80G of the Act on the ground that the University was exempted from income under section 10(23)(C)(iiiAB) of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.1998 for a period of 5 years. The recognition was further renewed for 3 years w.e.f ... This application was rejected by the CIT and withdrew the recognition altogether by holding that the University was neither eligible for exemption under section 10(23)(C) nor for registration under section 12A of the Act. The order of the CIT was challenged before the Tribunal and the Tribunal held

Sunshine Educational & Development Society, Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Exemption, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 4727/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT DR

Section 10(23)(c)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 194Section 2(15)Section 251(2)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI AMIT