← All Phrases

“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)

Jiwaji University, Gwalior vs. CIT, Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 33/IND/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

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

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

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

Jiwaji University, Gwalior vs. CIT, Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 32/IND/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

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

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

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

Bhag Kaur and Harnam Singh Zoria, Dasuya vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 16/ASR/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar01 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

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

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12A

date of the assessment order passed on 30.12.2011 and obtaining registration under section 12AA is not mandatory for claiming the exemption under section 10(23C) (iiiad) of the Act. As per this section, any income received by any person on behalf of any university or other educational institution existing solely ... existence but actual educational activity has not taken place. The ITAT held that the assessee still would get the benefit of section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. In the case of Pawan Hans Swami Uma Bharti Mission vs. ACIT (supra), it has been held by the Delhi bench I.T.A

Mesers Peer Panchal Educational and Welfare Trust, Jammu and Kashmir vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 598/ASR/2018[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 10Section 12A

assets, the applicant society provided the details of additions made during the F.Y. 2015-16. As regards to the reason for shifting from section 10(23C) (iiiad) to section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, the applicant has 5 Peer Panchal Educational And Welfare Trust v. CIT(E) contended that ... receipts crossing the threshold of Rs. One crore. The applicant had all the reasons to apply for exemption under the provision of section 10(23C)(vi) following the statutory provisions. This issue needs to be seen in light of the fact that numerous years in the past the society

Guru Nanak Dev Health & Education Society, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Ward, Jalandhar

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

ITA 610/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

learned CIT-A grossly erred in upholding Ld AO's action of denial of exemption claimed by the appellant under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act by following the assessment order of assessment year 2010- 2011, which was framed on the ground that appellant does not exist solely ... erroneous order and untenable conclusion. The onus which lies on the department has not been discharged and denial of giving benefit of section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act has been made arbitrarily. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of case and in law, the learned

Guru Nanak Dev Health & Education Society, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Ward, Jalandhar

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

ITA 609/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

learned CIT-A grossly erred in upholding Ld AO's action of denial of exemption claimed by the appellant under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act by following the assessment order of assessment year 2010- 2011, which was framed on the ground that appellant does not exist solely ... erroneous order and untenable conclusion. The onus which lies on the department has not been discharged and denial of giving benefit of section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act has been made arbitrarily. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of case and in law, the learned

Guru Nanak Dev Health & Education Society, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer Ward (Exemption), Jalandhar

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

ITA 608/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

learned CIT-A grossly erred in upholding Ld AO's action of denial of exemption claimed by the appellant under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act by following the assessment order of assessment year 2010- 2011, which was framed on the ground that appellant does not exist solely ... erroneous order and untenable conclusion. The onus which lies on the department has not been discharged and denial of giving benefit of section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act has been made arbitrarily. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of case and in law, the learned

Guru Nanak Dev Health & Education Society, Ludhiana vs. The Income Tax Officer(Exemptions, Jalandhar

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

ITA 173/ASR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

learned CIT-A grossly erred in upholding Ld AO's action of denial of exemption claimed by the appellant under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act by following the assessment order of assessment year 2010- 2011, which was framed on the ground that appellant does not exist solely ... erroneous order and untenable conclusion. The onus which lies on the department has not been discharged and denial of giving benefit of section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act has been made arbitrarily. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of case and in law, the learned

Pushp Niketan School Samiti, Biijnore vs. ITO, Dhampur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1130/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2015-16] Pushp Niketan School Samiti, Vs Ito, Sugar Mill, Campus Dhampur, Dhampur, Bijnor, Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh-246761. Uttar Pradesh, Pan-Aabtp8074C Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2023 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2015- 16 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-11, New Delhi Dated 20.06.2019. The Assessee Has Raised Following Ground Of Appeal:- 1. “Learned Cit(Appeals) Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Interest & Other Income Of Rs.2,45,757/- By Not Treating The Same As Income Of Educational Institute.” 2. At The Time Of Hearing, No One Attended The Proceedings On Behalf Of The Assessee. It Is Seen From The Records That No One Has Been Attending The Proceedings On Behalf Of The Assessee Since 05.01.2021. Therefore, The Appeal Is Taken Up For Hearing In The Absence Of The Assessee & Is Being Decided On The Basis Of The Material Placed On Record.

Section 10Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2015

Pacific Academy of Higher Education and Research Society, Udaipur vs. The Pr. CIT (Central), Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4/JODH/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Jan 2023AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri PC Parwal (C.A)For Respondent: Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain, (CIT-DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)

order dated 26 December 2019 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur, resulted into withdrawal of the approval granted under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with effect from 1% April, 2009 is bad in law, unjustified, based on assumption and presumption ... passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur, who assumed jurisdiction to initiate the proceeding as to withdraw approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot terms to be a prescribed authority in law in view of Notification

Global Health Research and Management Institute, Udaipur vs. Pr. CIT(Central), Jaipur

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

ITA 397/JODH/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 115BSection 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 153A

given from one Assessing Officer to other Assessing Officer and not from CIT to CIT. Therefore, registration under section 12A or approval under section 10(23C)(vi) can be withdrawn only by the prescribed authority who is empowered to grant the same. Notification No. 52/2014 and 53/2014 dated 22.10.2014 only ... made by the Commissioner of Income Tax thereby canceling the registration granted under section 12A and withdrawing the approval given under section 10 (23C) (v) & 10 (23A) (via) of the Act of 1961, to the petitioner Trust with retrospective effect from the date of 01st April, 2006, was arbitrary

Mahadevia Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad vs. Pr. CIT(Central), Jaipur

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

ITA 396/JODH/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 153A

given from one Assessing Officer to other Assessing Officer and not from CIT to CIT. Therefore, registration under section 12A or approval under section 10(23C)(vi) can be withdrawn only by the prescribed authority who is empowered to grant the same. Notification No. 52/2014 and 53/2014 dated 22.10.2014 only ... made by the Commissioner of Income Tax thereby canceling the registration granted under section 12A and withdrawing the approval given under section 10 (23C) (v) & 10 (23A) (via) of the Act of 1961, to the petitioner Trust with retrospective effect from the date of 01st April, 2006, was arbitrary

Manav Rachna Education Society, Raipur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Exemption), Bhopal

ITA 1/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 01/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Manav Rachana Education Society, A-1, Pushpak Apartments, Opp. Government School, Chhotapara, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aaaac6228R . ......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(vi)

solely for the reason that the application seeking approval was filed beyond the time limit prescribed under the sixteenth proviso to section 10(23C) of the Act, is highly unjustified, bad in law, unwarranted, unsustainable, not proper on the facts of the case and not in accordance with the provisions ... merits of the case must be deemed to have condoned the delay in filing the application for approval under the provisions of section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act hence, the Ld. CIT has grossly erred in rejecting the application merely on account of delay in filing of the application

Star Education Trust, Surat vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 539/SRT/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.539/Srt/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Court Hearing) The Star Education Trust, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), 9A, Ratnanilam Apartment, Piplod, Ahmedabad. Surat-395009. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabts2856F

Section 10Section 10(23)(vi)

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, [in short “the ld. CIT(E)”], in Appeal No. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad/2019-20/56D/10005, dated 27.09.2019, under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows ... activities through its institution namely, Tiny Star Higher Secondary School at Rajkot. 4. Learned CIT(E ) noted that as per second proviso of section 10(23C) it is specifically mentioned as under: "The prescribed authority, before approving any fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution

Shree Hari Ram Charitable Trust, Surat vs. ITO Exemption, Surat

In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as dismissed being infructuous

ITA 248/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Surat02 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Shree Hari Ram Charitable Trust, I.T.O.(Exemptions), 304, Meghdhanush Complex, Ward-Surat. Vs. Adajan Patia, Adajan Surat, Gujarat, India- 395009. Pan No. Aajts 1057 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(A)Section 12ASection 154Section 254(1)

short, the Act) dated 24/03/2017. The assessee filed its return of income on 31/03/2017 declaring NIL income after claiming deduction under Section 10(23C) of the Act of Rs. 1.22 crore. The assessee by mistake claimed deduction under Section 10(23C) instead of Section 11 of the Act. The assessee

M/S. Srinivas Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre, Mangalroe vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru

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

ITA 533/BANG/2022[N/A]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: N.A.

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 269S

quashed. The learned Pr.CIT, Bangalore ought to have appreciated 3. that none of the conditions mentioned in the un-numbered fifteenth proviso to section 10[23C] of the Act was attracted to the case of the appellant and that there were no specified violations to cancel / withdraw the approval granted ... recorded in the books of accounts and cannot be considered to be accumulation of capitation receipts. As per the unnumbered third proviso to Section 10[23C] of the Act, there is an embargo on investment or deposit of funds for any period otherwise than in any one or more

DCIT, Exemptions Circle, Hyderabad vs. Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Secunderabad

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

ITA 326/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya –
Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)

government organisations can be characterized as GPU charities It goes without saying that the other conditions imposed by the seventh proviso to Section 10(23C) and by Section 11 have to necessarily be fulfilled (v) As a consequence, it is necessary in each case, having regard to the first proviso ... seventeenth proviso (the latter introduced in 2012, w r e f 01 04 2009) to Section 10(23C), that the authority considering granting exemption, takes into account the objects of the enactment or instrument concerned, its underlying policy, and the nature of the functions, and activities, of the entity claiming

Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Exemptions Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 271/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya –
Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)

government organisations can be characterized as GPU charities It goes without saying that the other conditions imposed by the seventh proviso to Section 10(23C) and by Section 11 have to necessarily be fulfilled (v) As a consequence, it is necessary in each case, having regard to the first proviso ... seventeenth proviso (the latter introduced in 2012, w r e f 01 04 2009) to Section 10(23C), that the authority considering granting exemption, takes into account the objects of the enactment or instrument concerned, its underlying policy, and the nature of the functions, and activities, of the entity claiming

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Hyderabad vs. Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, Warangal

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

ITA 1881/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

government organisations can be characterized as GPU charities It goes without saying that the other conditions imposed by the seventh proviso to Section 10(23C) and by Section 11 have to necessarily be fulfilled ITA Nos.1877 to 1881/Hyd/2019 (v) As a consequence, it is necessary in each case, having regard ... first proviso and seventeenth proviso (the latter introduced in 2012, w r e f 01 04 2009) to Section 10(23C), that the authority considering granting exemption, takes into account the objects of the enactment or instrument concerned, its underlying policy, and the nature of the functions, and activities

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Hyderabad vs. Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, Warangal

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

ITA 1880/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –
Section 25l

government organisations can be characterized as GPU charities It goes without saying that the other conditions imposed by the seventh proviso to Section 10(23C) and by Section 11 have to necessarily be fulfilled ITA Nos.1877 to 1881/Hyd/2019 (v) As a consequence, it is necessary in each case, having regard ... first proviso and seventeenth proviso (the latter introduced in 2012, w r e f 01 04 2009) to Section 10(23C), that the authority considering granting exemption, takes into account the objects of the enactment or instrument concerned, its underlying policy, and the nature of the functions, and activities