“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)

Shyam Mitra Mandal Jogbani Trust Khatushyam Ji Jila Sikar, Sikar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Sikar

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

ITA 414/JPR/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Choudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 10Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U

Modern Public Vikas Samiti Tonk, Tonk vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 276/JPR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2023AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA Nos. 276 & 275/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year :- Modern Public Vikas Samiti Mohalla Shorgaran Subhash Bazar, Tonk – 304 001 cuke Vs. The CIT (Exemption) Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABAM 1303 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT-DR

Section 12Section 12ASection 80G

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh lanhixkslkbZ]U;kf;dlnL; ,oa

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (E)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 138/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal & Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax (E)-2(1) Mumbai ...... Appellant Vs. Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board Girni Kamgar Kareeda Bhavan, Elphinston Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaaam3255A ..... Respondent

For Respondent: Shri Vipul Joshi & Shri Ashok Patil, Ld.AR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 20Section 250Section 4

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (E)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board Girni Kamgar, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 137/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

For Respondent: Shri Vipul Joshi & Shri Ashok Patil, Ld.AR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 20Section 250Section 4

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

I M C of Iti, Gotegaon vs. Income Tax Officer(Exemption), Jabalpuran

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 99/JAB/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Imc Of Iti,Gotegaon, Vs. Ito (Exemption) Annex Bldg, Mission Jabalpur, Chowk, Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh- Madhya Pradesh- 482001. 482001. Pan/Gir No. : Aaaai2999F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rahul Bardia. Fca.Ar Respondentby : Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Are The Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) / Cit(A) Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia. FCA.ARFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

Mesers Improvement Trust, Fazilka vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(Exemptions), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 307/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 28

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. 1-4-2009), reaffirm this interpretation and bring uniformity across the statutory provisions. B. Authorities ... 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. C. Statutory regulators C.1. The income and receipts of statutory regulatory bodies which are for instance, tasked with

Durga Devi Sohan Lal Khatri Charitable Trust, Ajmer vs. The CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 327/JPR/2023[Not Applicable]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Singh Shekhawat- ProxyFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 12ASection 80G

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

Durga Devi Sohan Lal Khatri Charitable Trust, Jaipur vs. The CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 326/JPR/2023[NOT APPLICABLE]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Singh Shekhawat- ProxyFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 12ASection 80G

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

Chhattisgarh Rajya Open School, Raipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Exemption Circle, Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 2/RPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 02/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Chhattisgarh Rajya Open School Madhyamik Siksha Mandal, Pension Bada, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaagc0179F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Lahiri, CIT-DR

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

submission of the assessee has been considered but not acceptable. It is necessary to mention here that the entitlement for exemption under section 10(23c)(iiiab) is subject to two fold conditions:- 5 Chhattisgarh Rajya Open School Vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle, Raipur (I) The education institution/university must be existing solely ... position and percentage of Government Grants (i.e. 50%) for considering any university as substantially financed by the Government for the purposes of section 10(23C) of the Act. As it is clearly evident from the submissions of the assessee that the assessee society has not received any govt. grants during

Shivom Vidyapeeth Shikshan Samiti, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemetion 2, Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 261/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.261/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shivom Vidyapeeth Shikshan Samiti V Income Tax Officer 214, Shivom Vihar Raipur-492 013 S Exemption-2 Chhattisgarh Raipur Pan: Aahts 6464M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri G.S. Agrawal & Shubham Agarwal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 26.10.2022 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For Ay 2015-16, Instituted Against The Penalty Order By Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Dated 28.06.2018. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. That Under The Facts & The Law, The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Confirming The Order Of Penalty Levied By The Ld. Ao U/S 271(1)(C) At Rs.2,40,630/- Rejecting The Explanation. Prayed That Provisions Of Sec.271(1)(C) Are Not Applicable, Penalty Levied At Rs.2,40,630/- Kindly Be Cancelled. 2. That Under The Facts & The Law, The Ld. Cit (A) Further Erred In Confirming The Penalty Levied At Rs. 2,40,630/- U/S 271(1)(C) By The Ld. Ao, Though The Ld. Ao Did Not Allow Opportunity To The Appellant As To For Which Default, Penalty Proceedings Were Initiated. Prayed To Cancel The Penalty.

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal & ShubhamFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 57

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश सूद

Maharishi Dayanand Math, Jalandhar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical

ITA 229/ASR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Aug 2023AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Hintendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DR

Section 10

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Shri Shiv Shakti Mandir, Jalandhar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Exemptions), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical

ITA 228/ASR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Aug 2023AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Hintendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DR

Section 10

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Managing Committeee Swami Premanad Mahavidyalaya, Mukerian vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical

ITA 227/ASR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Aug 2023AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Hintendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DR

Section 10

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

M.P.Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The DCIT Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 427/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

seen in Page 5 of 22 ITA No.422 & other /Ind/2022 M.P. Madhyam Page 6 of 22 the context of Section 10(23C)(iv). When the expression "charitable purpose", as defined in Section 2(15) of the said Act, is read in the context of Section 10(23C ... Section 2(15) cannot be construed literally and in absolute terms. It has to take colour and be considered in the context of Section 10(23C)(iv) of the said Act. It is also clear that if the literal interpretation is given to the proviso to Section

M.P.Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The ACIT Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 425/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

M.P.Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The ACIT Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 423/IND/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

M/S M.P. Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The ACIT Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 422/IND/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

Breach Candy Hospital Trust, Mumbai vs. ACIT (E) - 1(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1719/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhbreach Candy Hospital Vs. Income Tax Officer, Trust, 60A, Bhulabhai Exemption Ward (1)(1) Desai Road, Cumballa Hill 506, 5Th Floor, Piramal S.O, Mumbai – 400026 Chamber, Lalbaug, Parel Mumbai – 400012 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatb0214D Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Shri Fenil Bhat Respondent By : S. Srinivasu Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Dated 21.03.2023 For A.Y. 2009-10. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: Exemption Under Section 10(23C)(Via) 1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Denying The Claim Of The Appellant For Grant Of Exemption Under Section 10(23Cx(Via) Of The Act. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Not Following The Directions Of The Hon'Ble Bombay High Court To Grant Exemption Under Section 10(23Cxvia) Pursuant To Ad-Interim Relief Granted To The Appellant Vide Order Dated 17 January 2011. The Learned Cit(A) Ought To Have Followed Directions Of Hon'Ble Bombay High Court. Provision For Gratuity To Be Treated As ‘Application Of Income’

For Appellant: Shri Fenil BhatFor Respondent: S. Srinivasu

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(3)

NFAC, dated 21.03.2023 for A.Y. 2009-10. The assesse has raised the following grounds before us: Exemption under section 10(23C)(via) 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in denying the claim of the appellant for grant of exemption under section 10(23CX(via) of the Act. 2. The learned ... under the Act, and (ii) complete assessments and all other proceedings under the Act on the basis that the Petitioners applications under section 10(23C)(via) are approved.” We find that inspite of the direction given by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court as referred above

Sarswati Vidhya Pratishthan M.P, Bhupal vs. The ACIT 2(1), Bhopal

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 392/IND/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisarswati Vidhya Pratishthan Dcit (E) M.P. Bhopal Vs. 01, Harshwardhan Nagar Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadas0899M Assessee By Shri Santosh Deshmukh & Shri Parth Jhawar, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2023

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 263

contained in Section 2(15) of the Act and hence such entities will not be eligible for exemption under Section 11 or under Section 10(23C) of the Act if they carry on commercial activities. Thus, on fair reading of Section 2(15) of the Act the newly inserted provision

Ar Rashid Education and Welfare Socity, Jaisalmer vs. The CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 377/JPR/2023[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2023AY 2023-2024

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA Nos. 377 & 376/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year :- AR Rashid Education And Welfare Society Barli Manda Pokaran, Jaisalmer 345 021 (Raj) cuke Vs. The CIT (Exemption) Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAHAA 0849 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquo

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80G

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh lanhixkslkbZ]U;kf;dlnL; ,oa