← All Phrases

“Section 13(5)”

Section References (mined)Section 13Section 13(5)15 judgments

HANDS ON CSR TRUST,BANGALORE vs. CIT, (EXEMPTIONS) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 264/BANG/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : Na

For Appellant: Sri Sampreeth B.S., A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand H Kalakeri, D.R
Section 12A

large scale activity and accordingly the assessee trust had invested Rs.40 lakhs in the fixed deposits as per the modes prescribed in section 13(5) of the Act in order to spend for future applications. Further, we also take a note of the fact that

SHRI GUJRATI VAISHNAV SEVA TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CIT (EXEMPTIONS), BENGALURU., BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 79/BANG/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : N.A Shri Gujrati Vaishnav Seva Trust Alake Behind, Sahyog Complex Near Gokarnath Temple Alake Vs. Cit (Exemptions) Mangalore 575 003 Bangalore Pan No : Aahts1233N Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Balram R Rao, A.R. Respondent By : Shri E Shridhar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey:

For Appellant: Sri Balram R Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Shri E Shridhar, D.R
Section 12A

large scale activity and accordingly the assessee trust had invested Rs.40 lakhs in the fixed deposits as per the modes prescribed in section 13(5) of the Act in order to spend for future applications. Further, we also take a note of the fact that

ST JOSEPH ENGINEERING COLLEGE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION,MANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 424/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2025-26

For Appellant: Sri Akash Deshpande & Sri Hemant Pai, A.RsFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 12ASection 2(15)

large scale activity and accordingly the assessee trust had invested Rs.40 lakhs in the fixed deposits as per the modes prescribed in section 13(5) of the Act in order to spend for future applications. Further, we also take a note of the fact that

DHWANI SHRISTI FOUNDATION ,BAGANALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2464/BANG/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Srinandini Das, D.R
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

large scale activity and accordingly the assessee trust had invested Rs.40 lakhs in the fixed deposits as per the modes prescribed in section 13(5) of the Act in order to spend for future applications. Further, we also take a note of the fact that

DHWANI SHRISTI FOUNDATION,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2463/BANG/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Srinandini Das, D.R
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

large scale activity and accordingly the assessee trust had invested Rs.40 lakhs in the fixed deposits as per the modes prescribed in section 13(5) of the Act in order to spend for future applications. Further, we also take a note of the fact that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, CHENNAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 679/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.679/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of The Indian Institute Of Engineering Income Tax, Vs. Technology, Exemptions Circle, 363, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Aaatt 2768C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथH की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate JkथH की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R. Raghunatha, A.M : This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter “Cit(A)] In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059500064(1), Dated 09.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assessing Officer For The Assessment Year 2012-13 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Vide Order Dated 20.03.2015. :- 2 -: 2. There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)

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

DCIT(EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SURAT URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SURAT

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 227/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section 143(3) (all w.r.e.f. 01.04.2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory

DCIT(EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SURAT URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SURAT

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 226/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section 143(3) (all w.r.e.f. 01.04.2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 344/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section 143(3) (all w.r.e.f. 01.04.2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 343/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section 143(3) (all w.r.e.f. 01.04.2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 342/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section 143(3) (all w.r.e.f. 01.04.2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory

JT.CIT(E), CIRCLE-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 335/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section 143(3) (all w.r.e.f. 01.04.2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory

JT.CIT(E),CIRCLE -2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 334/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section 143(3) (all w.r.e.f. 01.04.2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory

JT.CIT(EXEMPTION)CIRCL-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 333/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section 143(3) (all w.r.e.f. 01.04.2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory

M/S. BHAI HOSPITAL TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DIT (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4147/DEL/2011[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2021

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : Nil M/S. Bhai Hospital Trust, Dit(Exemption), 54, Janpath, Vs Plot No.15, 3Rd Floor, Connaught Place, Aayakar Bhawan, Laxmi New Delhi-110001. Nagar, District Centre, Pan-Aaatb0492M New Delhi-110092. Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. & Sh. Pulkit Verma, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 05.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2021

Section 10Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 2(15)

Another argument of the assessee is that since the assessee trust is also registered u/s 10(23C) of the Act, therefore, provision of section 13(5) of the Act is not applicable. The factum of registration u/s 10(23C) of the Act is not rebutted by the Revenue. The Ld.DIT