“Section 11(1)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 11Section 11(1)(b)11 judgments

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals\nare allowed except the limitation ground

ITA 355/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

For Appellant: \nShri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 13(8)Section 153(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 43B

Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 11", "Section 2(15)", "Section 13(8)", "Section 43B", "Section 234A", "Section 234B", "Section 143(3)", "Section 153", "Section 250", "Section 11(1)(b)", "Section 11(6)", "Section 10(23C)(iv)" ], "issues": "The main issue was whether the appellant's activities constituted 'trade, commerce or business' attracting

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals\nare allowed except the limitation ground

ITA 354/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: \nShri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 13(8)Section 153(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 43B

sections": [ "Section 11", "Section 13(8)", "Section 2(15)", "Section 43B", "Section 234A", "Section 234B", "Section 143(3)", "Section 153(1)", "Section 250", "Section 11(1)(b)", "Section 11(6)", "Section 10(23C)(iv)" ], "issues": "Whether the activities of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board are charitable, thus entitling

SCHOLARS EDUCATION TRUST OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1225/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT

Section 10Section 10(23)(vi)Section 11(5)Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 153(5)Section 2(41)

view that as per section 11(2) it\nis only 75 percent of the income referred to section 11(1)(a)or section 11(1)(b)\nreadwithExplanationto that sub-sectionis not applied or is not deemed to havebeen\napplied tocharitableor religious purposes in India during theprevious year but\nisaccumulated

DAYSPRING ENTERPRISES OF INDIA,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO., EXEMPTION WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our observations given hereinabove

ITA 1261/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘ए’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री मंजूनाथ

THE BOMBAY CATHOLIC SABHA,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3793/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3793/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Bombay Catholic बिधम/ Ito (Exem)-2(4) Sabha Piramal Chamber, Lal Vs. St. Michael’S Church Baug, Parel, Mumbai- Compound, Mahhim (W), 400012. Mumbai-400016. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatt3348L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. AR)

Section 11Section 11(2)

said money had been invested in the specified securities. The Commissioner (Appeals), thus, held that the assessed was entitled to exemption under Section 11(1)(b) of the Act. 7 A.Y. 2016-17 The Bombay Catholic Sabha 4. Being dissatisfied, the Revenue carried the matter in appeal to the Tribunal

BALJEEVAN TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEM. WARD 1(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 1872/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1872/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Bal Jeevan Trust बिधम/ Ito (E), Ward-1(1) A/14, Sterling Apartments, Piramal Chamber, Lal Vs. Peddar Road, Mumbai- Baug, Parel, Mumbai- 400026. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatb2973M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri J. D. Mistri Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 15.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Not Allowing The Accumulation Of Rs.30 Lakhs As Per Section 11(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Read With Rule 17 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (Hereinafter “The Rules”).

For Appellant: Shri J. D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12A

said money had been invested in the specified securities. The Commissioner (Appeals), thus, held that the assessed was entitled to exemption under Section 11(1)(b) of the Act. 4. Being dissatisfied, the Revenue carried the matter in appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has affirmed the view taken

PRERNALAYA TRUST,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD- EXEMPTION 2(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1242/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 11(2)Section 234B

ITA no.- 1242/Del/2023 Prernalaya Trust IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘F’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA

ITO (E), WARD- 2(3), NEW DELHI vs. THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF SHIVALA APA GANGADHAR , DELHI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the petition under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 226/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं .I.T.A No. 226/Del/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer (E) The Managing बनाम Committee Of Shivala Vs. Ward : 2 (3) Apa Gangadhar, Near Red Fort, New Delhi. Chandni Chowk, Delhi – 110 006. Pan No. Aaatt7829A अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""थ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V. Raj Kumar, Adv

Section 11(1)(d)

have paid amounts by way of donations that include the cheque with a letter with a specific direction, which is in compliance with section 11(1)(b). In case if the contributions are made without cheques, i.e., by cash, and oral direction has been issued to the trust to utilize

CANCARE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. THE COMM OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) NFAC, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1155/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1155/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16) Cancare Trust बिधम/ The Commissioner Of A-508, Byculla Service Income Tax (Appeals), Vs. Industries Premises Chs, National Faceless Appeal Dadaji Konddev Road Centre, Mumbai. Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatm4606L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Mr. Vallabh Gokhale/Ms. Mrunmayee Kajrekar Revenue By: Mr. P. D. Chougule (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 03/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Nfac), Delhi Dated 23.03.2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: - “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Including The Total Income Of The Appellant Accumulation U/S 11(2) Of The Act Amounting To Rs.1,20,13,966/- Without Taking Cognizance Of The Form 10 Filed By The Appellant On 29Th Sep, 2015 With The Office Of The Learned Ao. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Treating Ground No. 1 Of Cit(A) With Respect To Accumulation U/S 11(2) Of The Act As Withdrawn.”

For Appellant: Mr. Vallabh Gokhale/MsFor Respondent: Mr. P. D. Chougule (Sr. AR)

Section 11Section 11(1)(b)Section 11(2)Section 12A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY

RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 584/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Mrs. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(23)(C)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 154Section 234B

option to apply such income for such purposes during the previous year immediately following the previous year in which the income was derived (section 11(1)(b)). Above such option is to be exercised in form 9A to be furnished electronically to the assessing officer with or without digital signature

RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 563/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Mrs. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT DR

Section 10Section 10(23)(C)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 154Section 234B