← All Phrases

“Section 12(1)(ac)”

Section References (mined)Section 12Section 12(1)(ac)74 judgments

SIR CV RAMAN EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2941/CHNY/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. S

For Appellant: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N., CIT
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

other external hurdles that the assessee trust took considerable time to commence its activities. Taking us through the provisions of Explanation (e) of Section 12(1)(ac) of the Act, the Ld. AR submitted that, non-commencement or delayed commencement of charitable activities cannot be held

SIR CV RAMAN EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2940/CHNY/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. S

For Appellant: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N., CIT
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

other external hurdles that the assessee trust took considerable time to commence its activities. Taking us through the provisions of Explanation (e) of Section 12(1)(ac) of the Act, the Ld. AR submitted that, non-commencement or delayed commencement of charitable activities cannot be held

JHAVERBHAI PATEL RESERCH CENTRE ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

ITA 7359/MUM/2025[N.A ]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026
Section 11Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12A

nFurther, it is seen that the Trust has undertaken modification of the objects ad the\napplication is filed under clause (v) of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act. As per section\n12A(1)(ac)(v) of the Income tax Act:\nwhere the trust or institution has adopted or undertaken

SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2652/PUN/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2026-27

Bench: the Tribunal. Accordingly, we condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merits of the case.

For Appellant: Shri Premal Gandhi
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 25.11.2022. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements

SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2651/PUN/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2026AY 2026-27

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Premal Gandhi
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 25.11.2022. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements

QUALITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,ALIPUR ROAD , OPP TO ZAMBARE GANESH TEMPLE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 1, PMT BUILDING SHANKAR SHET ROAD PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1719/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1718 & 1719/Pun/2025 Quality Education Foundation, Vs. Cit, Exemption, Pune. 841, Alipur Road, Zambare Ganesh Mandira Samor, Shivaji Nagar, Barshi- 413411. Pan : Aaaaq0714C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Umesh Mali Revenue By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 18.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit, Exemption, Pune Rejecting The Application For Registration In Form No.10Ab Under Clause (Iii) Of Section 12A(1)(Ac) Of The It Act Filed On 08.06.2024 & Denying The Application For Approval In Form No.10Ab Under Clause (Iii) Of First Proviso To Sub-Section (5) Of Section 80G Of The It Act Filed On 09.06.2024. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of Both The Appeals. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeals Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Ld. Dr, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals.

For Appellant: Shri Umesh MaliFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 08.06.2024. The instant application was rejected by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune by observing as under :- “8. The provisions ... unjustified. Ld. AR submitted before us that originally the assessee filed application dated 23.10.2023 for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act and while rejecting it on the ground of delay vide order dated 15.04.2024 Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune also rejected

QUALITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,ALIPUR ROAD , OPP TO ZAMBARE GANESH TEMPLE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEPTION WARD 1, PMT BUILDING SHANKAR SHET ROAD PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1718/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1718 & 1719/Pun/2025 Quality Education Foundation, Vs. Cit, Exemption, Pune. 841, Alipur Road, Zambare Ganesh Mandira Samor, Shivaji Nagar, Barshi- 413411. Pan : Aaaaq0714C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Umesh Mali Revenue By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 18.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit, Exemption, Pune Rejecting The Application For Registration In Form No.10Ab Under Clause (Iii) Of Section 12A(1)(Ac) Of The It Act Filed On 08.06.2024 & Denying The Application For Approval In Form No.10Ab Under Clause (Iii) Of First Proviso To Sub-Section (5) Of Section 80G Of The It Act Filed On 09.06.2024. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of Both The Appeals. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeals Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Ld. Dr, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals.

For Appellant: Shri Umesh MaliFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 08.06.2024. The instant application was rejected by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune by observing as under :- “8. The provisions ... unjustified. Ld. AR submitted before us that originally the assessee filed application dated 23.10.2023 for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act and while rejecting it on the ground of delay vide order dated 15.04.2024 Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune also rejected

BHIKHA BEHRAM WELL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 5029/MUM/2025[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: N.A.

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Nara, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri. Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

filed as valid in the eyes of law and/or by treating the same as filed under sub clause (iii) of the provision of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act. Suffice to say, the Ld. Commissioner shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 4. In the result

B S RAI EDUCATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 3516/MUM/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Years: 2025-26 & Assessment Years: 2025-26 M/S. Bs Rai Education Trust, Cit (Exemptions), 201, Neera Govind, Room No.601, 6Th Floor, Govind Nagar, Cumballa Hill Mtnl Te S.N. Road, Building, Vs. Mumbai – 400 080 Pedder Road, Pan: Aabtb6348K Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai – 400 026 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Ganesh Kevat, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: These Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Even Dated 21.03.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2025-26. 2. Both The Appeals Are Interconnected & Having Involved Almost Identical Issues & Therefore For The Sake Of Brevity The Same Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This M/S. Bs Rai Education Trust Composite Order By Taking Into Consideration The Facts & Circumstances & Issue Involved In Ita No.3497/M/2025 As A Lead Case & Result Of The Same Would Be Applicable Mutatis Mutandis To Both The Appeals Under Consideration.

For Appellant: Shri Ganesh Kevat, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. D.R
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

eyes of law and/or by treating the same as filed under sub clause (iii) of the provision of M/s. BS Rai Education Trust section 12(1)(ac) of the Act. Suffice to say, the Ld. Commissioner shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 5. In the result

B S RAI EDUCATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 3497/MUM/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Years: 2025-26 & Assessment Years: 2025-26 M/S. Bs Rai Education Trust, Cit (Exemptions), 201, Neera Govind, Room No.601, 6Th Floor, Govind Nagar, Cumballa Hill Mtnl Te S.N. Road, Building, Vs. Mumbai – 400 080 Pedder Road, Pan: Aabtb6348K Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai – 400 026 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Ganesh Kevat, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: These Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Even Dated 21.03.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2025-26. 2. Both The Appeals Are Interconnected & Having Involved Almost Identical Issues & Therefore For The Sake Of Brevity The Same Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This M/S. Bs Rai Education Trust Composite Order By Taking Into Consideration The Facts & Circumstances & Issue Involved In Ita No.3497/M/2025 As A Lead Case & Result Of The Same Would Be Applicable Mutatis Mutandis To Both The Appeals Under Consideration.

For Appellant: Shri Ganesh Kevat, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. D.R
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

eyes of law and/or by treating the same as filed under sub clause (iii) of the provision of M/s. BS Rai Education Trust section 12(1)(ac) of the Act. Suffice to say, the Ld. Commissioner shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 5. In the result

SHIKSHA BHARTI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HARYANA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 5448/DEL/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(aciii)Section 2(15)Section 80G

merits of the matter and direct ld CIT(E) to consider assessee's applications on merits under either of the provisions of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act. Page 2 of 6 ITA No. 4646/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2017-18] Late Satish Mehta Vs.ITO 5. The ld. counsel for the assessee ... counsel for the assessee invited our attention to similar facts where applications were rejected for being made under incorrect clause of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act where Benches of ITAT have held that CIT(E) is required to not reject application on such technicalities and directed

SHIKSHA BHARTI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HARYANA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 5447/DEL/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(aciii)Section 2(15)Section 80G

merits of the matter and direct ld CIT(E) to consider assessee's applications on merits under either of the provisions of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act. Page 2 of 6 ITA No. 4646/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2017-18] Late Satish Mehta Vs.ITO 5. The ld. counsel for the assessee ... counsel for the assessee invited our attention to similar facts where applications were rejected for being made under incorrect clause of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act where Benches of ITAT have held that CIT(E) is required to not reject application on such technicalities and directed

EDUCARE (DADA CHI SHALA) EDUCATINAL TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 293/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2025

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Kimya KudvaFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 29.06.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements

EDUCARE ( DADA CHI SHALA) EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 292/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2025

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Kimya KudvaFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 29.06.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements

SHREE SANT SAVTA MAHARAJ VARKARI SAMPRADAYIK PRASADIK DINDI,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1148/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2025

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

society registered with Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 and has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 28.03.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other

SHREE SANT SAVTA MAHARAJ VARKARI SAMPRADAYIK PRASADIK DINDI,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1147/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2025

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.1147 & 1148/PUN/2025 | Shree Sant Savta Maharaj Vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune. | Varkari Sampradayik Prasadik | Dindi, | Sohala Shenacha Mala | Anandgram Javal Talegaon | Sanaswadi Road, Dhamdhere, | Shirur, Pune- 412208. | PAN: AAOAS1340L | Appellant | Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 16.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.07.2025 आदेश /

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

society registered with Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 and has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 28.03.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other

SHOOTING STARS FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1440/CHNY/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Mr. Babu Peram, CAFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Sr. DR
Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM

RASIPURAM VIVEKANANDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD,, SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1070/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.T. S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

SRI AMBHA MAHESHWARI DEVALAYA SEVA SAMITI,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA\nNo

ITA 599/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2025AY 2025-26
Section 12(1)(AC)Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 80G

{ "clean_text": "ITA No.598&599/Bang/2025\nSri Ambha Maheshwari Devalaya Seva Samiti, Bangalore\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n\"A

SRI AMBHA MAHESHWARI DEVALAYA SEVA SAMITI,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA\nNo

ITA 598/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2025AY 2025-26
Section 12(1)(AC)Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 80G

{ "clean_text": "ITA No.598&599/Bang/2025\nSri Ambha Maheshwari Devalaya Seva Samiti, Bangalore\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n\"A

Showing 1–20 of 74 · Page 1 of 4