← All Phrases

“Section 11(3)(a)”

Section References (mined)Section 11Section 11(3)(a)4 judgments

GMDC SCIENCE & RESEARCH CENTRE,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),, PALANPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is Allowed for Statistical purpose

ITA 958/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, Shri Jimi Patel &For Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

applied for the objects of the purpose, though the period of five years was expired on 31st March, 2008. Therefore, in view of section 11(3) of the Act, unspent amount Rs.2,98,00,000/- was being deemed income for the Asst. Year 2008-09. In view of the above ... applied for the objects of the purpose, though the period of five years was expired on 31-03-2008. Therefore, in view of section 11(3) of the Act, unspent amount Rs.2,98,00,000/- was being deemed income for the A.Y.2008-09 and demanded tax thereon. 4. Aggrieved against

GMDC SCIENCE & RESEARCH CENTRE,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),, PALANPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is Allowed for Statistical purpose

ITA 957/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, Shri Jimi Patel &For Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

applied for the objects of the purpose, though the period of five years was expired on 31st March, 2008. Therefore, in view of section 11(3) of the Act, unspent amount Rs.2,98,00,000/- was being deemed income for the Asst. Year 2008-09. In view of the above ... applied for the objects of the purpose, though the period of five years was expired on 31-03-2008. Therefore, in view of section 11(3) of the Act, unspent amount Rs.2,98,00,000/- was being deemed income for the A.Y.2008-09 and demanded tax thereon. 4. Aggrieved against

RAO BAHADUR DHARMAPARAVARTHA GUBBI THOTADAPPAS CHARITIES ,BENGALURU vs. ITO(EXEMPTIONS) WARD-2, BANGALORE

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

ITA 285/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Dr. N Suresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 11(3)(a)

funds were used for the routine functioning of the trust. Hence, the AO held that the assessee had violated the provisions of section 11(3)(a) of the Act and accordingly, . Page 3 of 8 the amount of ₹3 ... 3,31,611) was liable to tax under section 11(3) of the Act. 6. The AO also observed that a similar issue had arisen in the assessee’s own case for AY 2017-18, wherein a similar addition was made. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the exemption claimed

ASIA SOCIETY INDIA CENTRE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION)-1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3921/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia
Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 250

total of Rs.54,27,105/- which was since reversed and spent in the financial year 2011-12 being alleged deemed Income under section 11(3) of the Income Tax Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in invoking the provision ... section 11(3) of the Act in A.Y.2012-13, without considering the relevant provision of law.” 3. The Appellant is a not-for-profit company incorporated under Section 25 of the Companies Act and holding valid registration under Section 12A of the Act. For the Assessment Year 2012-2013, the Appellant