← All Phrases

“Section 13(2)(d)”

Section References (mined)Section 13Section 13(2)(d)5 judgments

SANDIP FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) 2(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6031/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Arun Khodpiashri Sandeep Singh Karhailsandip Foundation 2Nd Floor, Koteshwar Plaza, J.N. Road, Mulund (W), Mumbai – 400080 ............... Appellant Pan: Abefs2855C

For Appellant: Shri K GopalFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 13(2)(c)Section 13(2)(d)Section 154Section 234ASection 250

exemption under section 11, without duly appreciating the facts and evidences placed on record. IV. Addition of Rs. 27,96,600 /- made under section 13(2)(d) of the Act is unjustified 4. That on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the learned A.O has erred ... facts in adding a sum of Rs. 27,96,600/- to the income of the assessee by invoking section 13(2)(d) of the Act, holding that the said payment does not qualify for exemption under section 11, without duly appreciating the facts and evidences placed on record

ARYANS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST REGD, MOHALI,MOHALI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 1136/CHANDI/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1136/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2025-26 Aryans Educational & The Cit (Exemptions), Charitable Trust, Regd.Mohali Vs Chandigarh, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate, # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(ii)Section 13(3)

such the imprest account was not application of college funds by the Chairman within the meaning of section 13(1)(c) or section 13(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act. The learned AO has erred in law and facts in treating the imprest account of Chairman of the society

DCIT CIRCLE 1 (E) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ADARSH FOUNDATION, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1216/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

M/S ARYANS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,MOHALI vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 821/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 821/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 M/S Aryans Educational & Vs. The Dcit, Circle-1 Charitable Trust, बनाम (Exemptions), # 2129, Phase-10, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L

For Appellant: Sh. Tej Mohan, Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 115BSection 13(1)(c)Section 133(6)Section 68

such the imprest account was not application of college funds by the Chairman within the meaning of section 13(1)(c) or section 13(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act. The learned AO has erred in law and facts in treating the imprest account of Chairman of the society

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -26(1),MUMBAI, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX,MUMBAI vs. R D TATA TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3703/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Atui T. Suraiya, C.A and Shri T.P. Ostwal, C.A RevenueFor Respondent: Ms. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT, DR
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)(h)Section 143(3)

dealt with by the co-ordinate bench. We thus, by following the aforesaid decision in assessee’s own case, hold that provisions of section 13(2)(d) are not applicable in the present case. Accordingly, ground taken by the Revenue on this issue is dismissed. 8. In the result