← All Phrases

“section 11 exemption”

Charitable TrustsSection 11Section 1170 judgments

SANKALP SOCIETY,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), GHAZIABAD

ITA 332/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 331/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Ita No. 332/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Sankalp Society, Vs Income Tax Officer(E), 1, Rulapi Vihar, Saharanpur, Hapur Chungi, Uttar Pradesh-247001 Ghaziabad-201002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaats3377A Assessee By: Sh. Pratiyush Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2026 Order These Assessee’S Twin Appeals For Assessment Years 2014- 15 & 2018-19 Arise Against The Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Ahmedabad’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025- 26/1084344501(1) & 1084344609(1) Dated 02.01.2026, In Proceedings U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. Pratiyush Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

defects.” 4. A perusal of the assessee’s above extracted pleadings indicates that both the learned lower authorities have refused to its section 11 exemption claim for the sole reason of belated filing of tax audit report Form 10B, on or before the due date of filing of section

SANKALP SOCIETY,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), GHAZIABAD

ITA 331/DEL/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 331/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Ita No. 332/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Sankalp Society, Vs Income Tax Officer(E), 1, Rulapi Vihar, Saharanpur, Hapur Chungi, Uttar Pradesh-247001 Ghaziabad-201002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaats3377A Assessee By: Sh. Pratiyush Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2026 Order These Assessee’S Twin Appeals For Assessment Years 2014- 15 & 2018-19 Arise Against The Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Ahmedabad’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025- 26/1084344501(1) & 1084344609(1) Dated 02.01.2026, In Proceedings U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. Pratiyush Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

defects.” 4. A perusal of the assessee’s above extracted pleadings indicates that both the learned lower authorities have refused to its section 11 exemption claim for the sole reason of belated filing of tax audit report Form 10B, on or before the due date of filing of section

THE FEDERATION OF INDIAN PUBLISHERS,NEAR JNU vs. WARD EXEMP 2(3), DELHI, CIVIC CENTRE,NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 163/DEL/2026[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 163/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2024-25 The Federation Of Indian Publishers Vs Income Tax Officer, 18/1-C, Institutional Area, Aruna Ward Exemp-2(3), Asaf Ali Marg (Near Jnu), New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110067 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Mnrps2732P Assessee By: Sh. R. K. Kapoor, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2024-25 Arises Against The Addl./Jcit(A), Agra’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025-26/1079012042(1) Dated 29.07.2025, In Proceedings U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. R. K. Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 2

substantive grievance raised herein, it transpires that it is aggrieved against the learned lower authorities’ action holding it as not eligible to claim section 11 exemption since having filed Form 10B than the correct one i.e. Form 10BB, in the CPC’s section 2 The Federation of Indian Publishers

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

ITA 1670/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

their objection is only that there was no charitable activity in the form of education during the years under consideration and section 11 exemption is not available. We 33 I.T.A. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chny/24 find the contention of the assessee that there was no educational activity but however the assessee decided

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,\n2017-18 & 2018-19 are allowed and the appeal for AY 2015-16 is partly\nallowed

ITA 1669/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

their objection is only\nthat there was no charitable activity in the form of education during the\nyears under consideration and section 11 exemption is not available. We\nfind the contention of the assessee that there was no educational activity\nbut however the assessee decided to continue its charitable activity

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-4,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,\n2017-18 & 2018-19 are allowed and the appeal for AY 2015-16 is partly\nallowed

ITA 1667/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

their objection is only\nthat there was no charitable activity in the form of education during the\nyears under consideration and section 11 exemption is not available. We\nfind the contention of the assessee that there was no educational activity\nbut however the assessee decided to continue its charitable activity

KALYANAM KAROTI MEERUT,MEERUT vs. ITO EXEMPTION GZB, GHAZIABAD

Appeal is allowed

ITA 6505/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2017-18 Kalyanam Karoti, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 105, First Floor, Cgo Ii, Exemption, Hapur, Chungi, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan: Aaaak2780N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Sanjay Malik, Adv. Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 11Section 139(1)

each other 3. A perusal of the assessee’s above extracted pleadings indicates that both the learned lower authorities have refused to its section 11 exemption claim for the sole reason of belated filing of tax audit report Form 10B, on or before the due date of filing of section

SHREE JAGAT GURU BRAHMANAND GAUSHALA SAMITI,PANIPAT vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH

ITA 297/DEL/2022[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2025

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)

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

That being the case, we are of the considered view that such an issue of corpus grants etc. could be examined only in section 11 exemption proceedings since all what the learned CIT(Exemption) could consider at the time of section 12AA registration is the assessee’s object clauses

SHRI KRIPALU SAMADHI MANDIR TRUST,KALOL vs. THE CIT (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1608/AHD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2025-26 Kripalu Muni Mandal Trust The Ito, Ward At Malav, Taluka Kalol Vs. Exemption. Dist: Panchmahal. Vadodara. Pan : Aaatk 7859 F Asstt.Year : 2025-26 Shri Kripalu Samadhi Mandir Trust The Ito, Ward At, Post Malav Taluka Kalol Vs Exemption. Malav, Kalol. . Vadodara. Pan : Aapts 9485E (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Nishit Shah, Ar Assessee By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iv)

fresh application for 80G under the correct provisions has not yet been filed as not able to file. The previous claim of Section 11 exemption, which formed the basis of the rejection for the Section 10(23C)(iv)(B) application, is consistent with the Trust’s provisional registrations and ongoing

KRIPALU MUNI MANDAL TRUST,KALOL,PANCHMAHAL vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1607/AHD/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2025-26 Kripalu Muni Mandal Trust The Ito, Ward At Malav, Taluka Kalol Vs. Exemption. Dist: Panchmahal. Vadodara. Pan : Aaatk 7859 F Asstt.Year : 2025-26 Shri Kripalu Samadhi Mandir Trust The Ito, Ward At, Post Malav Taluka Kalol Vs Exemption. Malav, Kalol. . Vadodara. Pan : Aapts 9485E (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Nishit Shah, Ar Assessee By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iv)

fresh application for 80G under the correct provisions has not yet been filed as not able to file. The previous claim of Section 11 exemption, which formed the basis of the rejection for the Section 10(23C)(iv)(B) application, is consistent with the Trust’s provisional registrations and ongoing

M/S. ALTERNATIVE FOR INDIA DEVELOPMENT,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-4, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1732/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1732/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri. K. Vishwa Padmanabhan, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

substantive issue between the parties herein appears to be that of correctness of learned lower authorities’ action in disallowing the assessee section 11 exemption claim on the ground that it had belatedly filed its form 10B audit report dated 22.09.2022 than the due date of filing return ... Revenue’s case is that this tax audit report compliance is a mandatory provision for an assessee who claims section 11 exemption. 4. We note in this factual backdrop that the instant issue is no more res integra in light of ACIT v. Xavier Kelvani Mandal Pvt. Ltd. (Gujarat), wherein

BAL SEWA ASHRAM (ORPHANAGE),BHIWANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), ROHTAK

Appeal is allowed

ITA 844/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Deepam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 154

parties at length. Case file perused. 3. It transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have refused section 11 exemption to the assessee for the sole reason that it had failed to file/upload it’s corresponding Form 10 tax audit report within

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD), KOLAR

ITA 903/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 132(4)

appeal before us.\n22.\nThe learned DR before us submitted that the learned CIT(A)\ncommitted an error in granting the benefit of section 11 exemption to\nthe assessee trust for the assessment years 2017-18, 2018-19, and\n2019-20, despite his own clear finding that the assessee

M/S. SRI. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES(REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1561/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 132(4)

appeal before us.\n22.\nThe learned DR before us submitted that the learned CIT(A)\ncommitted an error in granting the benefit of section 11 exemption to\nthe assessee trust for the assessment years 2017-18, 2018-19, and\n2019-20, despite his own clear finding that the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 70 · Page 1 of 4