“section 10(23C)”

DeductionsSection 10(23C)Section 10(23C)1,207 judgments

The decision most relied on for section 10(23C) is CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (43 Taxmann.com 411), cited in 524 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on section 10(23C)

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur

43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court

524

citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

Escorts Ltd. v. UOI

199 ITR 43 · 1993 · Supreme Court

267

citing judgments

A statute should not be construed to permit double deduction for the same expenditure unless specifically provided by law.

CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne

146 ITR 28 · 1984 · High Court

195

citing judgments

Depreciation claimed by a charitable trust on its assets is an allowable application of income for computing exemption under Section 11, and this does not constitute a double deduction.

Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. Framjee Cawasjee Institute

109 CTR 463 · 1993 · High Court

191

citing judgments

A charitable trust is allowed to claim depreciation on its assets for computing its income, even if the capital expenditure incurred on acquiring those assets was treated as an application of income in the year of acquisition.

CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona

402 ITR 441 · 2018 · Supreme Court

187

citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable as a deduction even if the expenditure for acquiring the capital asset was treated as application of income for charitable purposes. This does not constitute a double benefit.

CIT v. Kasturi & Sons Ltd.

3 SCC 346 · 1999 · Supreme Court

153

citing judgments

Fiscal statutes must be construed strictly and literally. When the language is plain and unambiguous, courts must give effect to it without considering legislative intent or equitable considerations.

Queen’s Educational Society v. CIT

372 ITR 699 · 2015 · Supreme Court

152

citing judgments

An educational institution that generates a surplus does not automatically lose its charitable status or cease to exist solely for educational purposes. This is true if the surplus is reinvested for its educational objectives, and the predominant object test determines if the institution's primary aim is education or profit.

R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT

82 ITR 570 · 1971 · Supreme Court

131

citing judgments

Tax laws must be interpreted reasonably and in consonance with justice, even though equitable considerations are generally irrelevant in their interpretation.

Judgments citing section 10(23C)

University of Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption)- 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5391/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarita No. 5392/Mum/2025 (Ay: 2016-17) University Of Mumbai Ito (Exemption) - 2(3), Mumbai 12/Accounts Department, Vs. M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai- Ch-616, 6Th Floor, Mtnl, 400032. Ex-Building, Cumballa Hills, Pedder Road, Pan: Aaatu1070A Mumbai-400026. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250

total income of the assessee was determined at Rs. 16,69,13,980/- while disallowing the exemption claimed by the assessee under section 10(23C) (iiiab) of the Act and not granting the exemption under section 11(1)(a) of the Act, however, despite of affording various opportunities

Yoga Sanskar Sutra Foundation, Thane vs. ITO Exemption, Thane

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 5145/MUM/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankar & Yoga Sanskar Sutra V/S. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions) Foundation बनाम Qureshi Mansion, Gokhale Road, Nr Ramchandra Patil Thane, Naupada, Thane West, Thane – Ram Maruti Road, 400 602 Sandozbaugh – 400 607, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcy6878L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 8O

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) C. V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT

Yoga Sanskar Sutra Foundation, Thane vs. ITO Exemption, Thane

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 5144/MUM/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 8O

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) C. V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT

Rajaji Educational Society, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 437/VIZ/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

Officer [hereinafter in short “Ld.AO"]. Ld. AO in the absence of books of accounts and other relevant information denied the exemption claimed under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act and estimated 45% of the gross receipts as income of the assessee. Page. No 2 ITA Nos. 436 & 437/VIZ/2025 Rajaji ... appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 7. The only issue emanating from the grounds of appeal is denial of exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act by the revenue and the assessee is entitled for exemption 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. On this issue, Ld.Authorised Representative

Rajaji Educational Society, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 436/VIZ/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

Sadhu Rama Krishnareddy, Nalgonda vs. ITO., Ward-1, Suryapet

ITA 833/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

facts recorded by the CIT(A) were apparently in context of a case of an educational institution that had claimed an exemption under section 10(23C)(iii)(ab) of the Act. The Ld. AR further submitted that surprisingly the CIT(A) had thereafter in his observations, findings and decision referred ... appeal 7 Sadhu Rama Krishna Reddy vs. ITO pertaining to an educational institution/college substantially financed by the Government that had claimed exemption under section 10(23C)(iii)(ab) of the Act. Thereafter, the CIT(A) had in the statement of facts referred to an addition

Nadia Primary Teachers Training Institute, Krishnanagar vs. I.T.O., Ward - 41(1), Nadia

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1670/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: FixedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 10Section 250Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A

Sukhad Jeevan Sansthan, Chittorgarh vs. CIT (Exemption) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 447/JODH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur30 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 80GSection 80G(5)

stipulated in Rule 2C. or 11AA or 17A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, stipulated that "The application for registration or approval under section 10(23C), 12A or 80G of the Act, in Form No. 10AB, for which the last date for filing falls on or before 29th September ... while considering the issue whether the Id. CIT (Exemption) has power to condone the delay in filing application for grant of approval under section 10(23C) or not, has considered the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P v. Harish Chandra

Late Tilokchand Kuche Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Aurangabad vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 534/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.534/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: - Late Tilokchand Kuche V Commissioner Of Income Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, S. Tax, Exemption Pune. Plot No.17, Laxmidevi Balaji Mandir, Juni Mukundwadi, Aurangabad – 431001. Pan: Aabtl3131C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vijay B. Ambhore Revenue By Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing 15/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration Under Section 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 09.12.2024. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemption Erred In Rejecting The Application For Regular Approval U/S 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act In An Arbitrary Manner.

Section 10Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

regular registration u/s 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac)(i)/12A(1)(ac) (iii) nor any copy of regular approval under section 10(23C) read with clause (i) / (iii) of first proviso to the said section and the case is not covered under the exclusions provided vide proviso

Smt Vimla Devi Ram Laxman Sharma Shiksha Samiti, Agra vs. ITO, Ward Exemtion, Agra Rcc, Agra

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

ITA 185/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhsmt. Vimla Devi Ram Laxman Sharma Shiksha Samiti, Vs. Ito, Village Gadi Thana, Ward Exemption, Shamshabad, Agra. Agra – 283 125 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aakas3559F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.10.2025 Date Of Order : 28.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Addl/Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad [“Ld. Jcit(A)”, For Short] Dated 26.03.2025 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar For The Assessee Submitted That There Was A Delay Of 1650 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Ld. Cit (A) & The Ld. Cit (A) Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee On The Ground Of Inordinate

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 154

submissions made by the ld. AR of the assessee, we are of the view that the assessee has inadvertently filed the ROI under section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act whereas the assessee is in the field of imparting the education. Their case falls u/s 10(23C)(iiiad

Jain Citizen Foundation Trust, Lal Kothi Scheme, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur, Lal Kothi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 276/JPR/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80g

1 ITA NOS. 276 & 193/JP/2025 JAIN CITIZEN FOUNDATION TRUST VS CIT (E), JAIPUR आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME

Jain Citizen Foundation Trust, Lal Kothi Scheme, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Income Tax Department CIT Exemption, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 193/JPR/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80g

1 ITA NOS. 276 & 193/JP/2025 JAIN CITIZEN FOUNDATION TRUST VS CIT (E), JAIPUR आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME

V S K Charitable and Educational Trust, Pudukkottai vs. Income Tax Officer, Pudukkottai

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

ITA 1006/CHNY/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1006/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2024-25 V. V.S.K.Charitable & Educational Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Trust, Pudukkottai. No.7/66, Vasantha Illam,Mullainagar, Thirumayam Po, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai, Tamil Nadu-622 507. [Pan: Aactv1459L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.V.Alagappan, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2025 : घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 28.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.V.Alagappan, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 10Section 10(230)Section 11Section 13(10)

demand of Rs.29,66,610/-. In the appeal, assessee clarified the mistake in filling ITR 7. It clarified that instead of Section 10(23C)(iiiad) it mentioned section 11 by mistake. The Addl. CIT(A) accepted this mistake but rejected the claim of exemption under section 10(230) (iliad ... absence of any stamp/signature, the veracity of the same is not found ascertainable.” The Additional CIT(A) has refused to give benefit of section 10(23C)(iiiad) on flimsy reasons of: (i) Non authentication of Income and Expenditure Statement. (ii) Assessee has brought nothing conclusive on records that

Deccan Gymkhana, Pune vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 444/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Sharad A Vaze &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

dated 25/06/2021 in exercise of its power under section 119 of the Act, provided relaxation for various compliances, including making application under section 10(23C), 80G(5) (vi), 35(1)(ii)/(iia)/(iii) and 80G of the Act in Form No.10A/Form No.10AB, for approval / provisional approval /intimation / approval / provisional approval ... August 2021. (b) Thereafter, the CBDT vide Circular No.16 of 2021 dated 29/08/2021, further extended the date of filing of Form No.10A under section 10(23C), 12A, 35(1)(ii) / (iia)/(iii) or 80G, which was required to be filed on or before 30th June 2021 upto 31st March

Deccan Gymkhana, Deccan vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1554/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Sharad A Vaze &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle, Pune, Swargate vs. Maharashtra State Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 825/PUN/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake

Section 10Section 10(46)Section 143(1)

other grounds of appeal raised by the appellant, despite allowing relief on the limited ground that the appellant is eligible for exemption under section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act and therefore, it is submitted that the learned Addl CIT(A) ought to have adjudicated all grounds independently to ensure ... Delhi-Trib.), he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that where assessee, an educational institution, claimed exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) only after it received approval under section 10(23C)(i) read with section 10(23C) (vi) for relevant year, it was entitled for claiming

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Meerut, Income Tax Office vs. Umalok Charitable Trust, Meerut

In the result, impugned order is upheld and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1644/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.1644/िद"ी/2024(िन.व. 2011-12) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Bhainsali Ground, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Meerut, Uttar Pradesh 250001 बनाम Vs. Umalok Charitable Trust, C-111, Samart Place, Garh Road, Meerut, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Uttar Pradesh 250004 Pan: Aaatu-1532-F अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(Dr) "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Advocate सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 24/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Noida [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 14.02.2024, For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Revenue In Appeal Has Primarily Assailed The Order Of Cit(A) On Two Counts:- (I) Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,11,00,000/- Made On Account Of Unexplained Advances; & (Ii) Deleting The Disallowance Of Exemption Claimed By The Assessee U/S.10(23C)Of The Act Rs.84,22,244/-.

For Appellant: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Advocate

Section 10Section 10(23)(c)Section 12ASection 153C

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “सी”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अवधेश कुमार िम"ा, लेखाकार सद" के सम

M/S Sushila Devi Centre for Professional Studies and Research, Dehradun vs. PCIT (Central), Kanpur (Jao- Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Dehradun)

ITA 131/DDN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 12Section 127Section 127(2)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Shri Kripalu Samadhi Mandir Trust, Kalol vs. The CIT (Exemp), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1608/AHD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2025-26 Kripalu Muni Mandal Trust The Ito, Ward At Malav, Taluka Kalol Vs. Exemption. Dist: Panchmahal. Vadodara. Pan : Aaatk 7859 F Asstt.Year : 2025-26 Shri Kripalu Samadhi Mandir Trust The Ito, Ward At, Post Malav Taluka Kalol Vs Exemption. Malav, Kalol. . Vadodara. Pan : Aapts 9485E (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Nishit Shah, Ar Assessee By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iv)

both the assessees selected the incorrect sub-clause in the electronic form, filing the applications under clause (B) of the first proviso to section 10(23C) instead of the appropriate clause (i) or (iii) under section 12A(1)(ac). 3.3 The learned CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad, took the view that since ... assessees had themselves opted for the provisions of section 10(23C)(iv), they could not simultaneously claim registration under section 12A. Without affording any opportunity to rectify the defect or to explain the inadvertent error, both the applications were rejected vide separate orders dated 17.03.2025. 3.4 Aggrieved by the orders

Kripalu Muni Mandal Trust, Kalol, Panchmahal vs. CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1607/AHD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2025-26

For Appellant: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iv)