← All Phrases

“section 11 exemption”

Charitable TrustsSection 11Section 1170 judgments

The decision most relied on for section 11 exemption is CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (264 ITR 110), cited in 398 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on section 11 exemption

CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection
264 ITR 110 · 2003 · High Court
398
citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on assets for which the cost has been fully allowed as an application of income under Section 11 in previous years, when computing the income of a charitable trust. Charitable trusts are also entitled to carry forward their deficit.

ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
143 Taxmann.com 278 · 2022 · Supreme Court
390
citing judgments

If activities for the advancement of general public utility are carried on as a business, income from such activities is not exempt under Section 11, even if the profits are utilized for the main charitable object. The argument that profits from general public utility activities can be ploughed back to charity to maintain exemption is not a good law.

Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT
77 Taxmann.com 257 · 2017 · High Court
370
citing judgments

No disallowance under Section 14A can be made in the absence of actual exempt income, as Section 14A relates to the earning of actual income, not notional or anticipated income, thereby declining to apply the CBDT Circular dated 11th May 2014 in such cases.

Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT
101 ITR 234 · 1975 · Supreme Court
323
citing judgments

This case defines 'education' under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act as systematic instruction, schooling, or training given to the young for preparation for the work of life. It clarifies that 'education' in this context has a narrow meaning, not extending to every acquisition of further knowledge.

CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries
201 ITR 325 · 1993 · High Court
195
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the income tax return, as specified in provisions like Section 80J(6A) or 80-IA(7), is directory and not mandatory. Substantial compliance is achieved if the audit report is submitted at any time before the assessment is framed or completed, and benefits should not be denied merely due to a delay in furnishing it.

CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne
146 ITR 28 · 1984 · High Court
195
citing judgments

Depreciation claimed by a charitable trust on its assets is an allowable application of income for computing exemption under Section 11, and this does not constitute a double deduction.

PCIT v. Wipro Ltd.
140 Taxmann.com 223 · 2022 · Supreme Court
192
citing judgments

Exemption provisions under Chapter III, such as Section 10B(8), must be interpreted strictly, and any claim for such exemptions must be made in the return of income. The principles governing Chapter III (incomes not forming part of total income) differ from those for Chapter VIA (deductions in computing total income).

Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. Framjee Cawasjee Institute
109 CTR 463 · 1993 · High Court
191
citing judgments

A charitable trust is allowed to claim depreciation on its assets for computing its income, even if the capital expenditure incurred on acquiring those assets was treated as an application of income in the year of acquisition.

Judgments citing section 11 exemption

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

ITA 1559/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru vs. Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes, Kolar

ITA 1549/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru vs. Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes, Kolar

ITA 1548/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru vs. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes, Kolar

ITA 1547/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust, Kolar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

ITA 1060/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

Akriti, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Department, Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4476/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 4476/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2020-21 Akriti, Vs Income Tax Department, B-119, Baba Colony, Burari S.O., E-2, Ground Floor, Ara Centre, Burari, New Delhi-110084 Block E1, Jhandewalan Extension, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaata6832E Assessee By: None Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.08.2025 Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

perusal of the instant assessee’s appeal file indicates at the outset that both the learned lower authorities have denied it section 11 exemption for the precise reason that it had not filed it’s section 139(1) return as well as the prescribed Form 10B Tax Audit Report

Sew Foundation, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward-1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 499/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.499/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sew Foundation Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad (Exemptions), Ward 1(4) Pan:Aaats7433H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate V Siva Kumar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vinodh Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27/01/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-1 Coimbatore, For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-5 Coimbatore, 27-01-2025 Is Erroneous, Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case.

For Appellant: Advocate V Siva KumarFor Respondent: : Shri Vinodh Kannan, Sr. AR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 144Section 80G

investment in the modes prescribed u/s 11(5). 5.7 The AO has added the Corpus donation only as income and has allowed section 11 exemption on the revenue received during the year in the Income and expenditure account. The appellant has not filed any evidence to prove that the Corpus

Aati Pichra Mahila Avam Bujurg Vikash Munch, Faridabad vs. Exemptions Ward Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 622/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 11Section 139(1)

parties. Case files perused. 2. Suffice to say, it transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed section 11 exemption claim(s) to the assessee; involving varying sums for the sole reason that it could not file/upload the prescribed 10B tax audit report within ... date of filing section 139(1) return. The Revenue vehemently argues that the impugned disallowance of section 11 exemption deserves to be upheld as the above compliance is mandatory in nature. 3. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance in light of CIT vs. Xavier

Aati Pichra Mahila Avam Bujurg Vikash Munch vs. Exemptions Ward Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 621/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 11Section 139(1)

parties. Case files perused. 2. Suffice to say, it transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed section 11 exemption claim(s) to the assessee; involving varying sums for the sole reason that it could not file/upload the prescribed 10B tax audit report within ... date of filing section 139(1) return. The Revenue vehemently argues that the impugned disallowance of section 11 exemption deserves to be upheld as the above compliance is mandatory in nature. 3. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance in light of CIT vs. Xavier

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle), Bareilly vs. Varunarjun Trust, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 620/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 153C

Commissioner of Income Tax on the basis of which the AO gives exemption to the assessee. It is also to be appreciated that section 11 exemption is a yearly process whereby the AO has to grant exemption under section 11 while satisfying himself in the assessment proceedings for each assessment ... year separately. Your honour will appreciate that section 13 is a provision providing for non- applicability of section 11 exemptions. The provisions of this section are under the jurisdiction of the AO to be carried on during the assessment proceedings. In a specific year if the conditions of the section

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bareilly vs. Varunarjun Trust, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 619/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 153C

Commissioner of Income Tax on the basis of which the AO gives exemption to the assessee. It is also to be appreciated that section 11 exemption is a yearly process whereby the AO has to grant exemption under section 11 while satisfying himself in the assessment proceedings for each assessment ... year separately. Your honour will appreciate that section 13 is a provision providing for non- applicability of section 11 exemptions. The provisions of this section are under the jurisdiction of the AO to be carried on during the assessment proceedings. In a specific year if the conditions of the section

Dr K R Shroff Foundation, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1, Exmp, Ahmedabad

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 769/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 68

during the previous year, used or applied directly or indirectly for the benefits of any such person, in relation to such income, section 11 exemption would not apply.” 23. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held in that case that Section 13(1)(c) of the Act does not prohibit

ACIT (Exemption) Circle 1 Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Dr K R Shroff Foundation, Ahmedabad

ITA 1205/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 68

ITA Nos.1205 & 769/Ahd/2025 Assessment Years: 2018-19 ACIT(E) vs. Dr. KR Shroff Foundation Page 1 of 24 IN THE

The Happy School, Gurugram vs. Income Tax Officer Exemptions Ward, Faridabad

ITA 3373/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 11Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

each other. 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 10, on or before the due date of filing of section

The Happy School, Gurugram vs. ITO Exemption Ward, Faridabad

ITA 3354/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 11Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

each other. 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 10, on or before the due date of filing of section

International Buddhist Confederation, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward Exemption 1(2), Delh, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2881/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Income Tax Officer, International Buddhist Confederation, Ward- Exemption 1(2), Room No. 330-331, Vigyan Delhi Bhavan Annexe, Maulana Azad Road, South Avenue, New Delhi Pan: Aaaai6962J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, Ca Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 11Section 143(3)

income from other sources in the return; and, therefore, the same deserves to be treated as eligible income for the purpose of claiming section 11 exemption. The tribunal hereby see no merit in the assessee’s instant sole substantive ground once it had itself claimed the above interest income

Income Tax Officer(Exemption), Civic Centre vs. Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Memorial National Commitee, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesses is allowed

ITA 2718/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 2718/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Income Tax Vs M/S Sh. Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Officer(Exemption), Memorial National Committee, B- Ward-2(1), 14/A, Chatrapati Shivaji Bhawan, New Delhi Qutab Institutional Are, New Delhi-110016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafts3397H Assessee By : Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv., Sh. Rohit Jain, Ca Sh. Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.07.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14, Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1057999120(1) Dated 16.11.2023, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv., Sh. Rohit Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 80G

Both the learned representative next invites our attention to the CIT(A)/NFAC detailed lower appellate discussion reversing the assessment findings denying section 11 exemption to the assessee vide order dated 23.09.2022 thereby holding it to have been carrying activities in the nature of business, trade and commerce ... substantive ground as well as the main appeal to uphold the learned CIT(A) findings under challenge holding the assessee as eligible for section 11 exemption. Ordered accordingly. 6. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 15/07/2025. (S. Rifaur Rahman) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant

Institute of Clinical Research India Society, Dehradun vs. CIT(A), Dehradun

Appeal is allowed

ITA 45/DDN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Institute Of Clinical Research Vs. Commissioner Of Income India Society, Tax (Appeals), 1St Floor, Building No.1, Dehradun Treenetra Vihar, Near Kargt Chowk, Dehradun Pan :Aabai3710P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr

Section 11Section 12ASection 194Section 194JSection 2(15)Section 40

case, the Revenue could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the assessee/appellate; who happens to be the registered trust, is already entitled for section 11 exemption; and, therefore, we are of the considered view that such a disallowance made in its hands is not sustainable in light of tribunal

Sur Nirman Educational and Cultural Society, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2375/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 139(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 250

appellate proceedings. 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

International Road Federation-India Chapter, Delhi vs. ITO Ward Exemption-1(2), Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2287/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2023-24 Vs. Income International Road Federation Tax Officer -India Chapter, (Sindhu), Cl House, 4Th Floor, T-95A, Ward- Exemption 1(2), Yusuf Sarai Commercial Delhi Centre, Gautam Nagar, New Delhi Pan :Aaaai4265N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Vijay Vohra, Ca Department By Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr

Section 11Section 143(1)

prejudice to each other. 3. The Revenue’s vehement contention during the course of hearing is that the assessee has been rightly denied section 11 exemption for the sole reason that it ought to have filed its tax audit report prescribed in 10BB than that in 10B uploaded ... assessee’s case and directs the learned Assessing Officer to frame its consequential computation after treating the assessee as eligible for section 11 exemption in very terms. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd June, 2025 (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated