“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)

Income Tax Officer Exemptions 2(4), Mumbai vs. The Chembur Gymkhana, Mumbai

Appeals of the revenue are allowed for

ITA 491/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt.Renu Jauhriआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 46, 47, 48 & 491/Mum/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2015-16,2016-17 & 2018-19) Income Tax Officer V/S. The Chembur Exemptions 2(4), Gymkhana बनाम Mumbai 16Th Road Chembur, Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Mumbai 40071 Mtnl Building, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai 400026 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt4163F .. Appellant/अपीलाथ" Respondent/""तवाद"

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: 26.09.2025

Section 1Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 2(15)Section 250

limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2(15), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(8), 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 provisions.” Accordingly, the revenue

Income Tax Officer Exemptions 2(4), Mumbai vs. The Chembur Gymkhana, Mumbai

Appeals of the revenue are allowed for

ITA 48/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: 26.09.2025

Section 1Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 2(15)Section 250

Income Tax Officer Exemptions 2(4), Mumbai vs. The Chembur Gymkhana, Mumbai

Appeals of the revenue are allowed for

ITA 47/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: 26.09.2025

Section 1Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 2(15)Section 250

Income Tax Officer Exemptions 2(4), Mumbai vs. The Chembur Gymkhana, Mumbai

Appeals of the revenue are allowed for

ITA 46/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: 26.09.2025

Section 1Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 2(15)Section 250

Akshat Education and Chartable Trust, Anand vs. The ITO, Ward Exemption, Vadodara

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

ITA 1653/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Uday Kishanrao Kakne, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154

settled principle that only net income is taxable. 5. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate that even if exemption under Section 10(23C)(via) were to be rejected for any reason, the appellant was still entitled to deduction of revenue expenses incurred for running its educational activities. 6. Without ... appellant. Asst. Year : 2022-23 - 3– 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the CPC disallowed exemption claimed under section 10(23C)(via) due to a mismatch in the registration particulars in the ITR. The assessee thereafter corrected the relevant particulars on the Income Tax Business Application (ITBA

Lakulish Sanatan Sanskariti Prabodhan Abhiyan, Vadodara, Gujarat vs. CIT Exemption, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1367/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Ms. Priya Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 253(5)

Noble Educational Society (Civil Appeal No. 3795 of 2014), which held that while considering applications under similar provisions such as section 10(23C) of the Act, the Commissioner is empowered to examine not only the stated objects but also Lakulish Sanatan Sanskriti Prabodhan Abhiyan vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year

National Law Institute University, Bhopal vs. DCIT(Exemption), Bhopal

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

ITA 423/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

Educational Society 143 taxmann.com 276 (SC): “74, In R.R.M Educational Society's appeal before this court, the charitable status of the appellant within Section 10(23C) was denied inter alia on the ground that the institution was not merely imparting education but also was running hostels. It is clarified that ... Education Society (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court was concerned with the interpretation of activity of carrying hostel for the purpose of section 10(23C) which section has a much stricter phraseology. The section 10(23C) grants exemption to an institution ‘existing solely for educational purpose

ACIT(E), Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. Registrar Gujrat University, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1334/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR Shri Sulabh Padshah, AR

Section 10Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69

field of higher education, research, and extension activities. It is substantially financed by the Government, and its income is exempt under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. For A.Y. 2019-20, the assessee did not file a return of income, contending that it had no taxable income, and that ... material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee is a government-funded university whose income is exempt under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. There is no allegation of diversion of funds. The impugned addition is based solely on transactional data from the Insight Portal

Shri Santana Dharma Vidyalaya Association, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

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

ITA 495/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. P. M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. C.I.T

Section 10Section 11Section 143(1)Section 154

follows: “The Assessing Officer has not disputed that the trust is engaged in educational activities, which aligns with the objectives permitted under section 10(23C). As long as the income is used exclusively for educational purposes, the exemption should apply. In view of the discussion above, I hold that ... action to tax the appellant’s income appears procedurally and substantively incorrect due to failure to apply the valid exemption under section 10(23C), non-consideration of a technical filing error, procedural flaws in issuing the order under outdated sections, and lack of substantive evidence to dispute the educational nature

M/S. Alternative for India Development, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-4, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1732/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1732/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri. K. Vishwa Padmanabhan, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

ground that such report was uploaded a few days subsequent to the filing of the return, or that the return had inadvertently mentioned section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act instead of section 11 of the Act. Such technical discrepancies cannot defeat the substantive right of the assessee, particularly when

Pranab Kanya Sangha, North Twnety Four Parganas vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 704/KOL/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2025-26 Pranab Kanya Sangha………….……………………….……….……….……Appellant Barasat-I, Hridaypur, West Bengal-700127.. [Pan: Aaatp4743M] Vs. Cit(Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ashok Mukherjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 07, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.08.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Rejecting The Application Filed In Form 10Ab For Final Approval As Per The Provisions Of Section 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

dated 31-3-2022, extended time limit with respect to both existing trusts and new trusts for registrations under sections 10(23C), 12A and 80G(5) - However, CBDT, while extending time limit further vide impugned Clause 5 (ii) of Circular No. 6 of 2023, dated

Psr Sustainability Foundation, Pune vs. CIT(E), Pune

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

ITA 1921/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Respondent: Appellant by None

Section 12ASection 5Section 80G

assessee is neither regularly registered u/s 12AB read with section 12A(1) (ac) (i) /12A(1)(ac)(iii) nor having 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

Psr Sustainability Foundation, Pune vs. CIT(E), Pune

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

ITA 1920/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Respondent: Appellant by None

Section 12ASection 5Section 80G

Late Shri Jitendra Nagar Through His L/R Smt. Deepika Nagar, Baran vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Baran, Baran

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1382/JPR/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth Ranka, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT a

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 69A

barred by limitation. Therefore, on this count, we are inclined to quash the orders passed by the ld. PCIT withdrawing the approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. 4.5 Hon’ble ITAT, Raipur Bench in the case of Kachrulal Jitendra Kumar v. ITO[2025] 2 TMI 865 order

Acharya Shree Vidhyasagar Dayoday Pashu Sewa Kendra Tendukheda Damoh, Tendukheda Damoh vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Bhopal

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 32/JAB/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Sept 2025

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sameer Jain, Sh. Nishant Jain & Dr. H.SFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT DR

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

CBDT had given relaxation for the applications filed under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and clause (iii) of the first proviso to section 10(23C) of the Act. However, no such relaxation had been granted with respect to applications which had been filed under clause (iii) of the first proviso

Achariya Shree Vidhya Sagar Dayoday Pashu Seva Kendra Tendukheda Damoh, Vidhya Nagar Tendukheda Damoh vs. Commissioner (Exemption), Bhopal

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 31/JAB/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Sept 2025

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sameer Jain, Sh. Nishant Jain & Dr. H.SFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT DR

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

Gyan Vikas Samiti, Ambedkar Nagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ambedkar Nagar

In the result, the impugned orders of the Ld

ITA 8/ALLD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

For Appellant: (Application)For Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 10Section 249(4)Section 253(3)

appellant was not liable to pay any advance tax in view of its exempt income under the provisions of section 10(23C) (iiiad) being involved in educational activities. The order of the Ld. CIT (A) is on misconceived facts and against the principles of natural justice therefore liable ... appellant was not liable to pay any advance tax in view of its exempt income under the provisions of section 10(23C) (iiiad) being involved in educational activities. The order of the Ld. CIT (A) is on misconceived facts and against the principles of natural justice therefore liable

Gyan Vikas Samiti, Ambedkar Nagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ambedkar Nagar

In the result, the impugned orders of the Ld

ITA 7/ALLD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

For Appellant: (Application)For Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 10Section 249(4)Section 253(3)

Shri Guptnath Bal Shikshan Samiti Machalpur, Machalpur vs. ITO Ward Rajgarh, Rajgarh

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in

ITA 313/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10Section 131Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 80A

before the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139.” 4. Additionally, the Ld. AR also referred the 20th Proviso to section 10(23C) inserted by Parliament through Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 01.04.2023 and subsequently amended through Finance Act, 2023, reading as under: Page 4 of 13 Shri ... exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) claimed by assessee. Ld. AR went ahead to explain that although the Parliament has prescribed 20' proviso to section 10(23C) to deny exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) for non-filing of return but the said 20' Proviso is applicable from

Madresa Mohammadiyan and Panjataniya, Dahod Gujarat vs. CIT(E), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1118/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Madressa Mohammadiyn & Cit(Exemption) Panjataniya, Madresa Raildings Nehru Bridge B/H. Tower Talav Road, Dahod. Ahmedabad. Pan : Brdmo 8620 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Ankit Chokshi, Ar Assessee By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/09/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xii)Section 263

under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, that bank reconciliations explain credits including corpus donations, opening cheque clearances and reimbursements, and that exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) is available since receipts of each educational institution are below the prescribed limit. In the video conference, the assessee undertook to furnish supporting ... Assessing Officer ought to have independently verified genuineness of the trust’s activities and vouchers. As regards the assessee’s plea on section 10(23C)(iiiad), the PCIT noted that the Assessing Officer had dealt with the issue in paragraph 4.5.16 of the assessment order and that the matter