“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)

Yadunandan Education Charitable Trust, Gandhinagar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Ahemdabad

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

ITA 861/AHD/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleyadunandan Education Charitable The Commissioner Of Income Tax Trust, (Exemption), Nr. B6, Bhumipark Valva Village, Ahmedabad. Vavol, Vs. Gandhinagar, Gujarat – 382 016 [Pan – Aaaty 2415 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri B.K. Patel, Ar Revenue By Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav, Cit (Dr)

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

ITA No.861Ahd/2023 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA

Sunil Tibrewal Foundation, Bhiwandi, Thane vs. CIT (Exemptions), Pune

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

ITA 3520/MUM/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Anushree GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 10Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

registration i.e., the trust was neither registered under section 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1) (ac) (i)/12A(1)(ac) (iii) nor approved under section 10(23C) r.w. clause (i) / (iii) of first proviso to section 10(23C) of the Act. 8. Under the new regime, the e-filing portal ... neither registered under section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac)(i)/section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act nor approved under section 10(23C) read with clause (i)/(iii) of the first proviso to the said section and thus the case is not covered under the exclusion

Madhya Pradesh State Open School, Bhopal vs. DCIT(Exemption), Bhopal

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 365/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyania.Y. 2017-18

Section 10Section 144

best of her judgement. 6. The assessee has claimed exemption of Rs. 34636568/- u/s 10(23c)(iiiab). The provision of section 10(23c)(iiiab)of the Act allows to claim exemption to assessee who is wholly or substantially financed by Government. The explanation to section 10(23c)(iiiab) r.w. Rule ... There are no grants received by the assessee from government in any from thus assessee fails to meet the basic requirement of section 10(23c)(iiiab).” The AO has disallowed the exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act for want of the necessary details regarding the Govt. grant/Aid received

M/S People University, Bhopal vs. CIT Exemption, Bhopal

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 345/IND/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 10Section 2

principle laid down by the Supreme Court as indicated hereinabove and after considering the provisions of sub section 1(iii) of Section 10(23C) and the proviso thereto shall take a decision in the matter. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits

JCIT(OSD)(E) Circle-2(1), New Delhi vs. Population Services International, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1805/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 10(230)(iv)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 2(15)

shown in Income and Expenditure Account. The Ld. AO submitted proposal dated 12.12.2018 for Special Audit. Proposal for withdrawal of approval granted under section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act was also forwarded to Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi (“CIT(E)”) who issued show cause notice to the assessee ... projects. The activities of the assessee were not charitable and purely commercial in nature. The Ld. CIT(E) Delhi withdrew the approval under section 10(23C)(iv) granted to the assessee. Consequently, the Ld. AO 3 rejected the assessee’s claim of exemption and held its income to be taxable

Ghaziabad Development Authority, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT Circle Exemption, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 589/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 234A

they incidentally carry on a commercial activity, subject, however, to the conditions stipulated under Section 11(4A) or the seventh proviso to Section 10(23C), which are that8 (i) the business should be incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the entity, and (ii) separate books of accounts should

Ghaziabad Development Authority, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT E (Circle), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 305/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 234A

Vidyarthi Vikas Pratishthan Jalgaon, Jalgaon vs. Income Tax Department (NFAC), Delhi

ITA 1194/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1194/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Vidyarthi Vikas Pratishthan Assessment Unit, Income Jalgaon, V Tax Department(Nfac) Gat No.148, Yashwant Nagar, S Ramanand Nagar, Maharashtra – 425001. Pan: Aaatv6624R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Hari Krishnan – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 01/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 02/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Passed On 20.09.2023 Emanating From Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 20.09.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Dismissing The Grounds Of Appeal Filed Before Him By The Assessee & In Vidyarthi Vikas Pratishthan Jalgaon[A]

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57

income tax law. Moreover, upto the 8 Vidyarthi Vikas Pratishthan Jalgaon[A] assessment year 2002-03 the assessee was exempt from tax under Section 10(23C); from the assessment year 2006-07 it has been granted registration or a charitable institution under Section 12A making it eligible for the exemption

Dhyan Yog Gau-Seva Society, Delhi vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 708/JPR/2023[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jan 2024AY 2023-2024

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anoop Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80G

held that CIT(E) does not have any power to condone the delay in granting approval for earlier years. This decision is on section 10(23C)(vi) and thus not applicable. Even the principle laid down in this decision and the High Court decision referred therein is that even

Rabdi Vibhag Progressive Kelavni Mandal, Valsad vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 797/AHD/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024

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

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

extends the due date for electronic filing of such Form as under: (i) 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, 2022, may be filed

ACIT, CC-2(1), Kol, Kolkata vs. Shalimar Hatcheries Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 546/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,......................Respondent 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, 17Th Floor, Everest House, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] - A N D - C.O. No. 13/Kol/2023 (In I.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,..................Cross Objector 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 35(1)(ii)

ITA No. 546/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 & C.O. No. 13/KOL/2023 (in ITA No. 546/KOL/2023) Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd. IN THE INCOME

Radha Madhav Nishkam Seva Samiti, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6728/DEL/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2024

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Radha Madhav Nishkam Seva Samity vs. CIT

Section 12ASection 80G

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.” Considering the above facts

Baba Kishan Dass Education & Charitable Society, Fatehgarh Sahib vs. ITO (Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 467/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250(6)

assessment was framed under section 144 by the AO. 3.1 As per the AO, the assessee has filed its return of income under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act by showing income from other sources at Rs. 69,13,980. As per the AO, in order to claim ... relevant provisions, however in the instant case, the assessee society has failed to furnish the details/ information to substantiate its claim under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act and therefore the exemption claimed was disallowed and whole of the amount of Rs. 69,13,980/- was brought

Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Exemption Ward-1(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 492/HYD/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jan 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.491 & 492/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy Vs. Asstt. Director Of Income Temple, Keesara Gutta Tax, Hyderabad Exemption Ward-1(4) Pan:Aaeas2164C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Srikanth, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/01/2024

For Appellant: Shri S. Srikanth, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

Hence the exemption claimed in Sr.no. 4i to 4viii of Part B-TI is not allowed in accordance with the tenth proviso to section 10(23C) of the Income tax Act.” Page 2 of 7 ITA 491 and 492 Sri Tamalingeswara Swamy Temple 5. Since, the audit report in Form ... 10BB as mandated under section 10(23C) has not been filed on or before filing of the Return of Income, the exemption claimed u/s 10(23C) has not been granted by the Assessing Officer, CPC while processing the Return u/s 143(1)(a). 6. Aggrieved with such order

Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy Temple, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Exemption Ward-1(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 491/HYD/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jan 2024AY 2019-2020

For Appellant: Shri S. Srikanth, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

M/S. D. Banumaiah'S Educational Institutions, Mysuru vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Ward-1, Mysuru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 911/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 1Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

appeal before me. 3. The ld. A.R. submitted that that while filing their return of Income on 30/03/2017, they had claimed exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Act without further mentioning the sub-sections under which the exemption was claimed. While filing the return the column pertaining ... under the head “Details of the Projects/Institutions run by you” as follows: *Section under which exemption claimed, if any (see instruction para 11c) Section 10(23C)(iiiad) M/s. D. Banumaiah’s Educational Institutions, Mysuru Page 5 of 9 M/s. D. Banumaiah’s Educational Institutions, Mysuru Page 6 of 9 *Amount

Karma Falya Trust, Gandhinagar vs. The DCIT, Circle-1, Exmp., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 10/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)

Section 11 of the Act. The reason for the aforesaid disallowance was recorded by the CPC as under :- “Assessee approved under Section 10(23C)(iv) or 10(23C)(v) or 10(23C)(vi) or 10(23C)(via) and claiming exemptions under sr. no.4i to 4viii in Part

Baba Hira Singh Bhattal Institute of Engineering & Technology, Lehragaga vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 870/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aman Parti, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sharma, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 10Section 11

23C)(vi), though in the return filed by the appellant, the section under which exemption had been claimed had inadvertently been mentioned as section 10(23C)(iiiab). Exemption was claimed by the appellant u/s 10(23C)(vi) on account of approval by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana granted ... that it had claimed exemption under the said provision. It was, accordingly, due to an inadvertent error that the provision was mentioned as Section 10(23C)(iiiab). The exemption claimed u/s 10(23C)(vi) was pursuant to the approval ITA 870/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 23 granted by the Chief Commissioner

Aarambh Foundation, Indore vs. The CIT Exemption, Byhopal

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/IND/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jan 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniaarambh Foundation Cit-(Exemption) 220 Saket Nagar Bhopal Saket Nagar Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabaa 0609F Assessee By Shri Kunal Agrawal Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 04.01.2024

Section 12A

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.” 7.4 Thus

Padmashree Dr. D.Y.Patil University, Mumbai vs. ACIT Income Tax CC-7(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the

ITA 3265/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 115BSection 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “C” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale I.T.A