“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)

Sri Aravinda Educational Society, Guntur vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax/JCIT(A), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 505/VIZ/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.505/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2022-23) Sri Aravinda Educational Society V. Addl/ Jcit(A) 3-270, Green Fields, Kunchanapalli Guntur Tadepalli Mandalam Andhra Pradesh Guntur - 512301, Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaaas9805N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 10Section 143(1)

under section 143(1) of the Act and the income was determined at Rs.3,60,53,149/-. The assessee was granted approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act w.e.f. 22.06.2003. While filing the return of income for the impugned assessment year, the assessee disclosed gross receipts of Rs.3 ... which was set apart for future use. While filing the return of income assessee provided information that the assessee was accorded approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act with dated 27.06.2003. In compliance with the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of certainprovisions) Act, 2020, assessee

Icf Silver Jubilee Nursery & Primary School, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corp Ward 10(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 126/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 126/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Icf Silver Jubilee Nursery & Deputy Commissioner Of Income Primary School, V. Tax, Konnur High Road, Non Corporate Ward -10(1), Chennai – 600 038. Chennai. [Pan: Aabai-0461-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 10Section 10(23)(iiiab)

Appellant society, being formed solely for educational purposes, is exempted from tax in the hands of Appellant as per the provisions of Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act read with Rule 2BC of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") :-3-: ITA. No: 126/Chny/2024 8. The Appellant has placed ... Appellant wherein the courts have held that, i. CIT vs Children's Education Society [2013] 358 ITR 373/34 taxmann.com 285 (Kar.) Section 10(23C) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable/religious purpose (Society running institutions for educational purpose) - Assessment year 2005-06 - Whether where assessee- society runs several educational institutions

St Marks School Society, Jhansi vs. CIT, Exemptions

Appeal is allowed

ITA 28/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 10Section 11Section 12

Income Tax (Exemption) [in short, the “CIT(E)], Lucknow’s Din and order no. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM41/2023- 24/1058329611(1) dated 29.11.2023, involving proceedings under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest ... Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain; learned CIT/DR, that the assessee’s grievance raised herein is to the limited extent of it’s registration under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. This is for the precise reason that although it had admittedly moved for impugned registration u/s. 10(23C

Bihar State Educational Infrastructure Development Corp. Ltd, Patna vs. ACIT, Exemption Circle-1, Patna

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

ITA 344/PAT/2018[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Patna12 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

even otherwise the activity being akin and incidental to education can well be said to be an educational institution within the meaning of section 10 (23c) (iiiab) of the Act. 7. For that in any view of the matter the order of the ld. assessing officer as well ... activities on which the exemptions have been given. Amongst the above there is an important exemption which is granted to educational institutions under section 10(23C) in order to encourage the social purpose of the educational activity. 5. The section 10(23C)(iiiab) described with: "any income received

Lok Kalyan Mandal, Ganpati Mandir, Dr Hedgewar Nagar, Ichalkaranji vs. Exemption Ward, Kolhapur, Aayakar Bhavan

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

ITA 2337/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2024-25

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

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 (1)/(iii) of first proviso to the said section and the case is not covered under the exclusions provided vide

Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority, Mathura vs. CIT(E), Lucknow

ITA 376/AGR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 12ASection 133Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

board, or whatever such body may be called, from claiming that it is set up for a charitable purpose and seeking exemption under Section 10(23C) or other provisions of the Act.” We make it clear that the Revenue’s grounds nowhere pin-point any material that the assessee herein

Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority, Mathura vs. JCIT-(E) Circle, Ghaziabad

ITA 119/AGR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 12ASection 133Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority, Mathura vs. ACIT., Citcle-(E), Ghaziabad

ITA 118/AGR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 12ASection 133Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority, Mathura vs. ACIT., Circle-3, Mathura

ITA 419/AGR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 12ASection 133Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

Careleavers Inner Circle Forum, Jaipur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur

ITA 903/JPR/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Feb 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Sancheti, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 8Section 80G

affidavit, and he held that the applicant had taken benefit of section 11, 12 or clause (iv), (v), (vi) and (vi a) of section 10(23C), in the F.Y 2022-23. 12. Ld. AR for the appellant has contended that while dealing with an applications u/s 12AB

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Exemption, Ahmedabad vs. Shree Vallabh Seva Kendra, Valsad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 201/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate

Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250

grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act in respect of the entire income of Rs.17,86,23,269/- received during the year, in violation ... seventh proviso to Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act ignoring the facts that activity of keeping children below 6 years in hostels is not permissible as per ‘Regulatory guidelines for hostel of educational institutions for children' issued by National Commission for Protection of Children Rights. 2. Whether

G.H.R. Education Foundation, Nagpur vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

ITA 615/NAG/2024[--]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 10Section 366Section 8Section 80G

from the impugned order dated 30/08/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune, ["learned CIT(E)"] rejecting the approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:- "1. On the facts ... facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT Exemption, Pune ought to have granted approval under section 10(23C) (vi) of 2 G.H.R. Educational Foundation ITA no.538 & 615/Nag./2024 IT Act to the Appellant as the Appellant has duly complied with all the conditions as prescribed

G. H. R. Education Foundation, Nagpur vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

ITA 538/NAG/2024[0]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 10Section 366Section 8Section 80G

from the impugned order dated 30/08/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune, ["learned CIT(E)"] rejecting the approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act")t. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:- "1. On the facts ... facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT Exemption, Pune ought to have granted approval under section 10(23C) (vi) of 2 G.H.R. Educational Foundation ITA no.538 & 615/Nag./2024 IT Act to the Appellant as the Appellant has duly complied with all the conditions as prescribed

Income Tax Officer- 3(1), Range-1, Lucknow vs. M/S Gautam Buddh Panchsheel Shodh Sahitya Sanskriti Sansthan, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 414/LKW/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Respondent: The humble appellant most respectfully submits as under:-

Section 10

evident from the assessment order, hence, the AO is directed to examine whether the appellant has fulfilled all conditions mentioned in the section 10(23C)(iiiad) by conducting relevant inquiries if required and allow the above deduction/exemption in case all the conditions are fulfilled. 3. That on identical facts

Aanya Learning Foundation, Rampur vs. Commssioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Lucknow

ITA 590/LKW/2018[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: Na Aanya Learning Foundation Commissioner Of Income V. Tax (Exemptions) Lalazar Colony, Noor Mahal, Civil Lines, Rampur- 5, Ashok Marg, Lucknow- 244901(Up). 226001. Pan:Aaqca7482B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv Respondent By: Smt Namita S. Pandey, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 22 01 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06 02 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Namita S. Pandey, CIT(DR)

Section 10Section 10(23)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

Shri Chandra Bhan Singh Sikcha Samiti, Agra vs. ITO, Ward 2(1)(4), Agra

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

ITA 170/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Agra05 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Shri Chandra Bhan Singh Sikcha Vs. Ito, Samiti, Ward-2(1)(4), Village-Mukhari, Post Gadshan, Agra The-Kheragar, Agra-283124 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aafas8963E Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Shalenndra Srivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05/02/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shalenndra Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 144

assessee. On perusal of the order of the ld NFAC, we find that the ld NFAC had merely reproduced the provisions of section 10(23C) of the Act fully and held that assessee had not produced evidence to prove whether its gross receipts exceed Rs 5 crores

ACIT, Patna vs. New Era Social Development Welfare Society, Patna

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 296/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 144Section 2Section 250Section 288

giving several opportunities to justify its claim i.e. Details of project and institution run by assessee, for which it has claimed exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the I. T. Act, 1961. Further, for claiming exemption under section 11, assessee has also required to submit Form 108 under section ... these sections by the AO, without appreciating the positions of law before the insertion of section 13(10) and the relevant proviso of section 10(23C) which are effective only from 01.04.2023.” 2. Before us, right at the outset, the Ld. DR pointed out the provisions of section 13(10