← All Phrases

“Section 12(1)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 12Section 12(1)(b)23 judgments

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST (NOW KOTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 813/JPR/2024[AY 2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025
Section 250

nermed in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST (NOW KOTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 812/JPR/2024[AY 2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025
Section 250

nerred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST (NOW KOTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 811/JPR/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

erred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant Trust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in upholding the addition

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST,KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 803/JPR/2024[AY 2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025
Section 250

nerred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

DCIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 797/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2016-17
Section 250

nerred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

DCIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 796/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2009-10
Section 250

nerred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

DCIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 795/JPR/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2007-08
Section 250

nerred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

DCIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 794/JPR/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2006-07
Section 250

nerred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST,KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 774/JPR/2024[AY 2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025
Section 250

nerred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST,KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 773/JPR/2024[AY 2003-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025
For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

nerrred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST,KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 731/JPR/2024[AY 2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025
Section 250

nerred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant\nTrust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in\nupholding the addition

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE , JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 717/JPR/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

erred in not accepting the Income tax Return and audit report submitted by Appellant Trust in compliance with the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has erred in upholding the addition

SHREE AMAR KSHATRIYA SABHA CHARITABLE TRUST ,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 492/ASR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 492/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21

Section 11Section 119Section 12(1)(b)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250

mandates that the return of income for the relevant assessment year must be filed by a specific due date as per section 12(1)(b) rws 44AB of the Act. For the assessment year in question, the extended due date was 15th February 2021 as per CBDT’s order

RAJPUT PANCHAYAT DHARMSHALA,HARIDWAR, UTTRAKHAND vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 189/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 12(1)(b)Section 12(1)(ba)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154

succeed. Hence, these appeals are here. 4. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that the proviso to section 12(1)(b) of the Act read with Rule 12(2) of the Income Tax Rules mandated filing of the audit report in Form 10B electronically. It was contended that there

RAJPUT PANCHAYAT DHARMSHALA,HARIDWAR, UTTRAKHAND vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 186/DDN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 12(1)(b)Section 12(1)(ba)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154

succeed. Hence, these appeals are here. 4. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that the proviso to section 12(1)(b) of the Act read with Rule 12(2) of the Income Tax Rules mandated filing of the audit report in Form 10B electronically. It was contended that there

WOMEN ORGANISATION FOR SOCIO CULTURAL AWARNESS,KEONJHAR vs. ITO,EXEMPTIONS, CUTTACK

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

ITA 67/CTK/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 250

allowed nor the benefit of deduction for the expenditure made was allowed. The updated return was processed on 13 February 2023 and as section 12(1)(b) was not complied with, the exemption claimed was not allowed. The Ld. DR relied upon the order

BRIGHT LAND COLLEGE,,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 227/LKW/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2013-14 Bright Land College, Vs. Income Tax Officer 538A / 543/5, Triveni Nagar (Exemption), Lucknow, The Sitapur Road, Lucknow Jurisdictional Assessing Officer Pan:Aaatb4391F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 02.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.04.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Passed On 17.10.2022 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing The Order, Which Is Unlawful, Unjustified & Against The Principles Of Natural Justice. 2. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing The Order Without Giving Adequate Opportunity Of Being Heard. 3. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding Ad Hoc Disallowance Of Expense Of Rs. 1,54,57,795/- Against The Order Passed U/S 143(1) Of Income-Tax Act Without Following The Procedure Laid Down In Sub-Section (1) Of Section 143 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961. 4. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Granting Exemption U/S 11 & 12 Of The I. T. Act, 1961. 1 Bright Land College A.Y. 2013-14

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12(1)(b)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250

submitted that the assessee society maintains proper books of accounts, which were audited by a Chartered Accountant as per the provisions of section 12(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act. The correct computation of income under section 11 that ought to have been submitted by the assessee ... Rs.2,17,56,278/- as per the provisions of section 11 as contained in the audit report prepared as per the provisions of section 12(1)(b) of the Act, he pointed out that the expenditure involved had to be relatable to collection of student fee. When income falls under

TEXTILE DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

ITA 887/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. Shingte
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

uploaded. It is worthwhile to mention here that to claim the benefit of exemption u/s 11 & 12 the assessee was required as per section 12(1)(b)(ii) to furnish the audit report before the specified date referred to in section 44AB of the IT Act. As per section 44AB ... furnished by the assessee prior to one month of the due date for furnishing the return of income, therefore, the compliance of section 12(1)(b)(ii) r.w.s. 44AB, Explanation (ii) was very well made by the assessee and accordingly the order passed by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Jaipur

ITO(EXEMPTION),WARD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SURESH AMIYA MEMORIAL TRUST, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 652/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Kaustav Chakraborty &For Respondent: Shri Arup Chatterjee, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 44A

filed Form No.10B in time, therefore, it was not eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act and the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act were violated. The Revenue has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd. [arising

BHOJALRAM LEUVA PATEL SEVA SAMAJ TRUST,DEVKI GALOL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 668/AHD/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT D.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

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

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2