← All Phrases

“registration under section 12A”

Charitable TrustsSection 12ASection 12A2,527 judgments

The decision most relied on for registration under section 12A is ACIT v. Surat City Gymkhana (300 ITR 214), cited in 125 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on registration under section 12A

ACIT v. Surat City Gymkhana
300 ITR 214 · 2008 · Supreme Court
125
citing judgments

Once an institution receives registration under Section 12AA, the Assessing Officer must compute its income as per Section 11, focusing only on the application of income and not re-examining the charitable nature of its activities. The Supreme Court also clarified the meaning and scope of 'general public utility' under Section 2(15).

Ananda Social and Educational Trust v. CIT
426 ITR 340 · 2020 · Supreme Court
116
citing judgments

For registration under Section 12AA, the Commissioner (Exemptions) must examine the objects of the trust and the genuineness of its proposed activities, even if the trust has not yet commenced actual charitable activities or incurred expenditure.

Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. ACIT
396 ITR 323 · 2017 · High Court
108
citing judgments

Development authorities can continue to be regarded as existing for a 'Charitable Purpose' under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, even after the introduction of the proviso to that section. The contention that such authorities automatically lose their charitable status due to the proviso is incorrect.

CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board
295 ITR 561 · 2007 · Supreme Court
98
citing judgments

A statutory corporation undertaking activities that generate income qualifies as a charitable entity under Section 2(15) if its dominant object is general public utility and it is legally obligated to apply its income solely for that purpose, even if the activities appear to be in the nature of trade or business. Such an entity is entitled to registration under Section 12A and exemptions under Section 11.

CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat
364 ITR 31 · 2014 · Supreme Court
83
citing judgments

A trust's objects, even if based on religious tenets, can qualify as charitable for tax exemptions if its benefits are not exclusively restricted to a particular religious community or caste.

CIT v. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association
140 ITR 1 · 1983 · Supreme Court
82
citing judgments

An object beneficial to a section of the public, as distinguished from an individual or group of individuals, qualifies as an object of general public utility under Section 2(15) and hence a charitable purpose. This applies even if the benefits are restricted to a specific caste, community, or professional group.

CIT v. Parma Nand
268 ITR 172 · 2004 · High Court
81
citing judgments

Whether there was sufficient cause for delay in making applications for registration under section 12A and 80G is always a question of fact, and contumacious conduct by the assessee must be established for levying penalty under section 271C for non-deduction of TDS.

Barendra Prasad Ray v. ITO
129 ITR 295 · 1981 · Supreme Court
80
citing judgments

When determining if an activity serves charitable purposes for tax exemption, the primary consideration is whether its predominant object is to make a profit or to carry out charitable activities.

Judgments citing registration under section 12A

Islamic Research Foundation, Pune vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4498/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay V. Deshmukh
Section 10Section 117Section 12ASection 14Section 153A

that the Appellant is a trust registered with office of the Charity Commissioner vide registration No. b/1409/M, dated 21.12.1990 and was granted registration under Section 12A of the Act on 05.03.1991 (Registration No. TR/27949). Further, the Appellant was also registered under the provisions of Foreign Currency Regulation (FCRA ... proposal regarding cancellation of registration under Section 12A of the Act of the Appellant-Trust was received by the CIT(E) from the Additional Commission of Income-Tax (Exemptions) – Range 1, Mumbai as vide order, dated 13.12.2016, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs had cancelled the registration

M/S Federation of Freight Forwarders Associations in India, Mumbai vs. ITO 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.1 of the assessee is allowed and additions amounting to Rs

ITA 710/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S Federation Of Freight Forwarders Associations, 311/313, Mahinder Chambers, W.T. Patil Marg, Opp. Dukes Factory, Chembur, Mumbai-400071 Pan: Aaatf0039J ...... Appellant Vs. Ito (Exemption)-1(3), Piramal Chambers 4Th Floor, Dr. S.S. Road, Parel, Mumbai-400012. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Nitesh Joshi Respondent By : Sh. Indira Adakil, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/07/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

For Appellant: Sh. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Sh. Indira Adakil, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 2Section 2(15)

those schools - Thus, assessee was pursuing objects, namely, medical education and medical relief to medical students and doctors - Assessee filed an application seeking registration under section 12A - Commissioner (Exemption) rejected same observing that activities of society was guided by principles of mutuality and did not bestow upon society characters inherent ... Whether since it was admitted fact that objects of assessee were charitable and it was a genuine trust, it was to be granted registration under section 12A - Held, yes [Paras 5, 7 and 9] [In favour of assessee]” [2022] 137 taxmann.com 117 (Raipur - Trib.), IN THE ITAT RAIPUR BENCH Confederation

Gymnastics Sevabhavai Sanstha, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed with above directions

ITA 2010/MUM/2020[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Cit Exemption, Pune Gymnastics Sevabhavi Sanstha Room No. 322, 3Rd Floor, Flat No. 101, Building No.4, Income Tax Office, Raunak Park, Pokharan Road, Pmt Building, Vs. No.2, Kokanipada, Thane (W) Shankar Seth Road, Mumbai-400 606 Pune- 411 037 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aactg 7323 G Assessee By : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Koli, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2022

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Koli, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 15Section 2Section 2(15)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM CIT

M/S. Amara Jyothi Education Trust, Bangalore vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 698/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL

M/S. Amara Jyothi Education Trust, Bangalore vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 690/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL

R.D.Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (E)-2(2) (Now Assessed by the Asstt.CIT 17(3)), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No.3 to 5 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3081/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Shri S N Kabra
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

Assessee is a public charitable trust registered with the Charity Commissioner under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 and holding a valid registration under Section 12A of the Act during the relevant previous year. The Assessee filed return of income for Assessment Year 2012-13 on 27.09.2012 declaring „Nil income

Mig Cricket Club Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Dy Director of Income Tax (E)-Circle- 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 990/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: This Tribunal. Affidavit Filed By The Assessee Vide Order Dated 10.5.2022 Is Placed On Record. The Affidavit Contained Detailed Averments Explaining Reasons For Delay. We Are Convinced With The Said Contentions Raised In The Affidavit & Facts Stated In The Affidavit Were Not Found To Be False By The Revenue. Hence, We Are Inclined To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before Us & Admit All The Appeals Of The Assessee For Adjudication.

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2(15)

with law. We find that learned DIT(E) had passed an order giving effect to the Tribunal’s order on 24.12.2018 restoring the registration under section 12A of the Act to the assessee-club. Admittedly, the learned Assessing Officer did not have benefit of this giving effect order ... restoring registration under section 12A of the Act, while passing the assessment order. 10. We find that though the learned Assessing Officer had not granted exemption under section 11 of Act to the assessee in the assessment proceedings, ultimately he had only sought to be bring to tax interest income

Mig Cricket Club, Mumbai vs. Dy Director of Income Tax (E)-Circle- 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 989/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: This Tribunal. Affidavit Filed By The Assessee Vide Order Dated 10.5.2022 Is Placed On Record. The Affidavit Contained Detailed Averments Explaining Reasons For Delay. We Are Convinced With The Said Contentions Raised In The Affidavit & Facts Stated In The Affidavit Were Not Found To Be False By The Revenue. Hence, We Are Inclined To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before Us & Admit All The Appeals Of The Assessee For Adjudication.

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2(15)

with law. We find that learned DIT(E) had passed an order giving effect to the Tribunal’s order on 24.12.2018 restoring the registration under section 12A of the Act to the assessee-club. Admittedly, the learned Assessing Officer did not have benefit of this giving effect order ... restoring registration under section 12A of the Act, while passing the assessment order. 10. We find that though the learned Assessing Officer had not granted exemption under section 11 of Act to the assessee in the assessment proceedings, ultimately he had only sought to be bring to tax interest income

Mig Cricket Club, Mumbai vs. Dy Director of Income Tax (E)-Circle- 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 988/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: This Tribunal. Affidavit Filed By The Assessee Vide Order Dated 10.5.2022 Is Placed On Record. The Affidavit Contained Detailed Averments Explaining Reasons For Delay. We Are Convinced With The Said Contentions Raised In The Affidavit & Facts Stated In The Affidavit Were Not Found To Be False By The Revenue. Hence, We Are Inclined To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before Us & Admit All The Appeals Of The Assessee For Adjudication.

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2(15)

with law. We find that learned DIT(E) had passed an order giving effect to the Tribunal’s order on 24.12.2018 restoring the registration under section 12A of the Act to the assessee-club. Admittedly, the learned Assessing Officer did not have benefit of this giving effect order ... restoring registration under section 12A of the Act, while passing the assessment order. 10. We find that though the learned Assessing Officer had not granted exemption under section 11 of Act to the assessee in the assessment proceedings, ultimately he had only sought to be bring to tax interest income

Mig Cricket Club, Mumbai vs. Dy Director of Income Tax (E)-Circle- 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 987/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: This Tribunal. Affidavit Filed By The Assessee Vide Order Dated 10.5.2022 Is Placed On Record. The Affidavit Contained Detailed Averments Explaining Reasons For Delay. We Are Convinced With The Said Contentions Raised In The Affidavit & Facts Stated In The Affidavit Were Not Found To Be False By The Revenue. Hence, We Are Inclined To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before Us & Admit All The Appeals Of The Assessee For Adjudication.

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2(15)

with law. We find that learned DIT(E) had passed an order giving effect to the Tribunal’s order on 24.12.2018 restoring the registration under section 12A of the Act to the assessee-club. Admittedly, the learned Assessing Officer did not have benefit of this giving effect order ... restoring registration under section 12A of the Act, while passing the assessment order. 10. We find that though the learned Assessing Officer had not granted exemption under section 11 of Act to the assessee in the assessment proceedings, ultimately he had only sought to be bring to tax interest income

Slum Rehabilitation Authority, Mumbai vs. DIT (E), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2436/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Promod Kumar ()And Ms. Suchitra Kamble () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Slum Rehabilitation Authority, Director Of Income Tax (Exemption), Sra Administrative Building, Vs. R. No. 616, 6Th Floor, Piramal Anantkanekar Marg, Behind Hdil Chambers, Lalbaug, Tower, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaajs 1094 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Raichandani, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Harendra N. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/04/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat Raichandani, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Harendra N. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)

mentioned in the Second Proviso was increased to Rs.25 lakhs by the Finance Act, 2011 w.e.f. 01.04.2012. The Slum Rehabilitation Authority was granted registration under Section 12A on 01.04.2002 3.1 The Director of Income Tax (Exemption) observed that for assessment year 2010-11, it was found that ... under: 26. What essentially follows is that the remedy to the proviso to Section 2(15) coming into play is not denial of registration under section 12A or 12AA but denial of benefits of exemption under section 11 under section 13(8). That is the reason that along with

Saifee Burhani Uplifetment Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption)-2, Mumbai

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

ITA 1305/MUM/2021[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, Sr. AR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

duly registered under section 12AA of the Act. Thus, the only provision applicable to the assessee trust for the purpose of applying for registration is section 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act. Further, section 12AB(1)(a) of the Act provides that where an application is made under section

Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5701/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akkhade
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

December, 2011 denying exemption u/s 11 to the Appellant solely on the ground that the Appellant’s registration under Section 12A had been cancelled. c. Aggrieved by the Order of DIT(E) canceling the appellants registration an appeal was filed before the Hon’ble Tribunal. d. Against the order

Versova Kokni Sunni Jamat Trust, Mumbai vs. CPC Bangalore, Bangalore

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

ITA 5905/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Firoz AndhyarujinaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 250

could be allowed to the assessee under section 11 of the Act, rejected the contention of the assessee that irrespective of status of registration under section 12A of the Act the receipts for specific purposes cannot be treated as income under section 2(24) of the Act by placing reliance

Sheila Gopal Foundation, Mumbai vs. The CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 986/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं. 986/मुं/2021(िन.व.2016-17) Sheila Gopal Foundation Vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Construction House-B, 2Nd Floor (Exemptions), Room No.617, 6Th Floor, 623, Linking Road, Khar (West) Piramal Chamber, Lal Baug, Parel, Mumbai-400 052 Mumbai-400 052 Pan : Aabts5672B Appellant Respondent

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

also not felt relevant that on this issue assessee trust is in appeal.” 3. The assessee is a charitable trust and was granted registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee filed return of income on 30/09/2016 for the assessment year under consideration declaring total income

Media Research Users Council, Mumbai vs. ADIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6459/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– 1(1) 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent) Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– Range 1 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(e)Section 25

Tribunal in the assessee's own case, wherein the Tribunal has held that the Assessing Officer cannot deny benefit of section 11 if registration under section 12A is not cancelled (pages 1-4 of PB — ITAT order for AY 2000-2001 and pages 5-7 — ITAT orders ... held that the benefit of section 11 cannot be denied by holding that the assessee is not a charitable entity without withdrawing the registration under section 12A. Without prejudice, it is submitted that only such income as falls within the ambit of the provisions of section 13 would lose exemption

Media Research Users Council, Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (E) RG 1, Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7108/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– 1(1) 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent) Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– Range 1 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(e)Section 25

Tribunal in the assessee's own case, wherein the Tribunal has held that the Assessing Officer cannot deny benefit of section 11 if registration under section 12A is not cancelled (pages 1-4 of PB — ITAT order for AY 2000-2001 and pages 5-7 — ITAT orders ... held that the benefit of section 11 cannot be denied by holding that the assessee is not a charitable entity without withdrawing the registration under section 12A. Without prejudice, it is submitted that only such income as falls within the ambit of the provisions of section 13 would lose exemption

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle - 1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Kammavari Sangham, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1429/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10Section 11Section 12A

educational institutions. The AO, thereafter, concluded that voluntary contributions are nothing but a capitation fee. It is seen that the assessee enjoys registration under section 12A of the Act and except for the compliant of the AO that the assessee received voluntary contribution, there has been no other charge

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Circle- 1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Kammavari Sangham, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1428/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10Section 11Section 12A

educational institutions. The AO, thereafter, concluded that voluntary contributions are nothing but a capitation fee. It is seen that the assessee enjoys registration under section 12A of the Act and except for the compliant of the AO that the assessee received voluntary contribution, there has been no other charge

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Bangalore vs. M/S. Kammavari Sangham, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1427/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10Section 11Section 12A

educational institutions. The AO, thereafter, concluded that voluntary contributions are nothing but a capitation fee. It is seen that the assessee enjoys registration under section 12A of the Act and except for the compliant of the AO that the assessee received voluntary contribution, there has been no other charge