← All Phrases

“Section 11(1)(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 11Section 11(1)(2)7 judgments

CENTRE FOR E-GOVERNANCE ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE

ITA 936/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri S Parthasarthi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)

allowing deduction under section 11 in respect of Capital Expenditure incurred, Income accumulated or set apart for e-Governance project under section 11(1)(2) and deduction under section 11(1)(a) for accumulation of 15 percentage of Gross Revenue as per provisions of the Act. Ground

KERALA BEEDI AND CIGAR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,KANNUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD , KANNUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 668/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: BEFORESHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERAND SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri V M Veeramani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Leena Lal, (SR.AR.)
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A

Officer reported in [2025] 171 taxmann.com 466 (Chennai - Trib.)held where assessee-trust, initially mentioned Rs. 71.77 lakhs instead of Nil under section 11(1)(2) and later filed a revised audit report and claimed repayment of loan as application of income, since assessee’s claim was supported by audited

KERALA BEEDI AND CIGAR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,KANNUR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 659/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: BEFORESHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERAND SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri V M Veeramani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Leena Lal, (SR.AR.)
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A

Officer reported in [2025] 171 taxmann.com 466 (Chennai - Trib.)held where assessee-trust, initially mentioned Rs. 71.77 lakhs instead of Nil under section 11(1)(2) and later filed a revised audit report and claimed repayment of loan as application of income, since assessee’s claim was supported by audited

GOENKA & ASSOCIATES EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DCIT EXEMPTION - CIRCLE 1, MUMBAI

The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4444/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S, Hon’Blegoenka & Associates Educational Dcit Exemption Circle 1 Trust, Mumbai. Vs. Yashodham High School Bldg., General A K Vaidya Marg, Goregaon, Mumbai 400 063. Pan Aaatg1248E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Shri Amod Prabhudesai & Naman JainFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)

future application which does not have validation of the Act. The income cannot be deemed to be applied in ways otherwise than under section 11(1)(2) or 11(2) of the Act. However as the correct amount of provision for gratuity is Rs.33995248 made by the assessee

CHEVALIER P J CHERIAN ARTS AND CULTURAL FOUNDATION,ASHOK NAGAR vs. DDI EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

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

ITA 702/CHNY/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.702/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2021-22 Chevalier Pj Cherian Arts & The Ddi (Exemptions), Cultural Foundation, Vs. Chennai. 45, First Avenue Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600083. [Pan: Aaaac 8002B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri P. Ravichandran, Ca ""थ" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R. Raghunatha, A.M : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Surat [Hereinafter “Cit(A)] In Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1060188727(1), Dated 29.01.2024. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal. 1. The Orders Of The Assessing Officer & The First Appellate Authority Are Contrary To Law. 2. The Denial Of Exemption Under Section 11 To The Extent Of :- 2 -: Rs.16,60,000/- Is Contrary To Law When The Appellant Had Filed Form 10 Along With The Necessary Resolution For Accumulation Of Income. 3. The Denial Of Exemption By The First Appellate Authority On The Grounds That The Audit Report In Form 1Ob Was Incomplete Is Erroneous & In Any Case The Appellant Ought To Have Been Given An Opportunity To Rebut & Explain The Incompleteness. 4. The Appellant Craves Leave To Raise Additional Grounds.”

For Appellant: Shri P. Ravichandran, CAFor Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा"" एवं

RANI ADAIKALARAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST ,TRICHY vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS, TRICHY

In the result the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 575/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 575/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Income Tax Officer, Rani Adaikalaraj Educational V. Exemption Ward & Charitable Trust, Income Tax Office, Represented By Managing 44, Williams Road, Cantonment, Trustee – A Joseph Francis, Trichy – 620 001. 7-B, Arokiasamypillai Lane, Crawford, Trichy – 620 012. [Pan:Aaatr-0494-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. V.S. Jayakumar, Sr. Counsel For Ms.G. Vardinikarthik, Advocate & Mr. V. Arunachalesh, Advocate & Mr. R. Sumedha, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. R. Vikneswaran, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr. V.S. Jayakumar, Sr. Counsel for Ms.G. VardiniKarthik, Advocate & MrFor Respondent: Mr. R. Vikneswaran, JCIT
Section 1Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)

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

JAISALMER VIKAS SAMITI,JAISALMER vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 116/JODH/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.116/Jodh/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 7

invited our attention in the APB pages 7 to 8related ITR 7 where it is mentioned that the correct figures in claim of section 11(1)(2) of the Act. The assessee submitted the Form No. 10 in APB page-10 and modified Form is in APB page-11 where