“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)

Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board, Dehradun vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

In the result, all three appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5130/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10(46)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH

Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board, Dehradun vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

In the result, all three appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5129/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10(46)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH

Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board, Dehradun vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

In the result, all three appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5128/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10(46)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH

Kota Vipassana Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 557/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपील सं./ITA No. 257 & 557/JP/2025 U/S 12AB & 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year : 2025-26 Kota Vipassana Trust बनाम The CIT (Exemption) Vs. Jaipur 1, Dhammathali, Via Sisodiya Rani Ka Bagh Galta Ji Road, Jaipur – 302 002 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAETK 8352 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Shailesh Mantri, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Mantri, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf

Shivohum Public Charitable Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 549/JPR/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 548&549/JP/2025 U/S 12AB & 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear :- Shivohum Public Charitable Trust Pulse Hospital,N.H.8, Kotputli Jaipur 303 108 (Raj) Jaipur बनाम The CIT (Exemption) Vs. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABHTS 1081 K निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri R.S. Poonia, CA राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by: Mrs. Alka Gautam, C

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Poonia, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

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

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf

Shivohum Public Charitable Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 548/JPR/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 548&549/JP/2025 U/S 12AB & 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year :- Shivohum Public Charitable Trust Pulse Hospital,N.H.8, Kotputli Jaipur 303 108 (Raj) Jaipur बनाम Vs. The CIT (Exemption) Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABHTS 1081 K निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri R.S. Poonia, CA राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by: Mrs. Alka G

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Poonia, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

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

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf

Kota Vipassana Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 257/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Mantri, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf

Income Tax Officer, Exemptions, Madurai vs. John Vincent Jamila Education Trust, Melur, Madurai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 901/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.545/Chny/2025 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)

Income-tax Act, 1961 when the assessee had neither filed valid audit report within the time stipulated as per proviso to section 10(23C) nor had obtained condonation for the delay in fling of audit report from the Competent Authority.” 3. The assessee filed its return of income ... Bengaluru, vide ITA Nos545/Chny/2025 & John Vincent Jamila Education Trust :- 3 -: intimation order dated 26.05.2020, disallowed the exemption claimed under section 10(23C) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on the ground that the assessee had not filed the audit report in Form 10BB along with the return

John Vincent Maila Education Trust, Madurai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Madurai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 545/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.545/Chny/2025 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)

Wadhawa Mission, Anand Nagar, Telibandha vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 385/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.385/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Wadhawa Mission House No.141, Anand Nagar, Telibandha, Raipur-492 007 (C.G.) Pan: Aaaaw5873C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sakshi Gopal Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 148

status of AOP for the AY 2018-19 which has not filled return of income as the income was exempted U/s Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act and has maintained the proper books of accounts and the same are audited which copy of the audit report was uploaded during ... available before the assessing officer during the course of assessment proceedings. Even otherwise the entire surplus/profit from the education should be exempted U/s Section 10(23C)(iiiad) which is reproduced there under: "During the course of proceeding u/s 148A the appellant has submitted all the required documents to establish that

Jan Seva Mandal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Ward -1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 3445/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jan Seva Mandal, Central Processing Centre Income Vinayalaya, Mahakali Caves Tax Deparment, Bengaluru, Vs. Road, Andheri (East), Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400093. Ward 1(4), Mumbai. 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatj 4868 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan PatelFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

provision Income chargeable to tax will be recomputed as per the provision of Section 13(10) or twenty second proviso to Section 10(23C) of of Section 13(10) or twenty second proviso to Section 10(23C) of of Section 13(10) or twenty second proviso to Section 10(23C

Helping 23 Wings Foundation, Jaipur vs. CIT (Exemption), Jaipur

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

ITA 530/JPR/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Banthia, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80G

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf

Helping 23 Wings Foundation, Jaipur vs. CIT (Exemption), Jaipur

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

ITA 529/JPR/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Banthia, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80G

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf

Kongu Welfare Trust, Villupuram vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

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

ITA 1298/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1298/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Kongu Welfare Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.2/1, Vijayapuram Iind Street, Exemptions Ward 1, Chinnasalem – Tk, Villipuram, Chennai. Villupuram 606 201. [Pan:Aactk2793E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Mudit Bohra, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Raised 6 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is 2

For Appellant: Shri Mudit Bohra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.CIT

Section 10Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 2(15)

facts relating to the case of the assessee are that the assessee filed its return of income on 30.08.2018 and claimed exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The return was selected for complete scrutiny and the Assessing Officer issued notice under ... section 2(15) of the Act. Since the assessee could not produce the registration under section 12A of the Act or approval under section 10(23C) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration and not filed the audit report in Form 10B, the Assessing Officer held the entire

Sanvedna Educational and Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO, Exemption, Ward, Thane

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

ITA 2610/MUM/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2025

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kuamr Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha, Adv &

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

Incomes which do not form part of total income. Both sections 10 and 11 are included within this chapter. Moreover, first line of section 10(23C) starts with the words "any income received by any person on behalf of Intention of the legislature is clear. If the conditions

Shri Radharani Jan Kalyan Sewa Sansthan, Bharatpur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 486/JPR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Anoop Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80G

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Shri Radharani Jan Kalyan Sewa Sansthan, Bharatpur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 485/JPR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Anoop Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80G

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

DCIT, (E) Circle-1(1), New Delhi vs. Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7073/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Delhi Development Authority, Vs Jcit(Exemption), Room No.205, B-Block, Vikas Range-1, New Delhi Sadan, Ina, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Dcit(Exemption), Vs Delhi Development Authority, Central Cirlce-1(1), B-Block, Vikas Sadan, Ina New Delhi Colony, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Dcit(Exemption), Vs Delhi Development Authority, Circle-1(1), B-Block, Vikas Sadan, Ina New Delhi Colony, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Anubhav Goel, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2025 Order

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)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. ITA Nos.6894, 7072 & 7073/Del/2018 ... body may be called, from claiming that it is set up for a charitable ITA Nos.6894, 7072 & 7073/Del/2018 purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act. C. Statutory regulators C.1. The income and receipts of statutory regulatory bodies which are for instance, tasked with

DCIT, (E) Circle-1(1), New Delhi vs. Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7072/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 250

Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi vs. JCIT(E), Range- 1, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6894/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 250