← All Phrases

“corpus donation”

Charitable TrustsSection 11(1)(d)Section 11(1)(d)517 judgments

The decision most relied on for corpus donation is CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (211 ITR 293), cited in 204 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on corpus donation

CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal
211 ITR 293 · 1995 · High Court
204
citing judgments

A charitable trust can carry forward its excess expenditure from previous years and adjust it against the income of subsequent years, which qualifies as an application of income under Section 11. Additionally, voluntary contributions received for a specific purpose are treated as corpus funds and are not taxable.

CIT v. Programme for Community Organisation
248 ITR 1 · 2001 · Supreme Court
90
citing judgments

The 15% exemption available to charitable trusts under Section 11(1)(a) is absolute and is not curtailed by the provisions of Section 11(2) regarding accumulation of income. Voluntary contributions received towards the corpus of a trust are excluded from the scope of income for Section 11(1)(a) exemption purposes.

CIT v. Programme for Community Organisation
228 ITR 620 · 1997 · High Court
73
citing judgments

For charitable or religious trusts, income for exemption under Sections 11 and 12 must be computed on a commercial basis, not head-wise as per Section 14, treating expenditure as a charge against income. The net income, along with non-corpus donations, forms the eligible base for determining the application of funds and the permissible accumulation under Section 11(1)(a).

P.M. Mohammed Meerakhan v. CIT
73 ITR 735 · 1969 · Supreme Court
58
citing judgments

The assessee bears the onus to prove the genuineness and voluntary nature of donations received, including corpus donations. Failure to discharge this burden allows the Assessing Officer to treat such donations as non-genuine or accommodation entries.

CIT v. Bijli Cotton Mills (P) Ltd.
116 ITR 60 · 1979 · Supreme Court
48
citing judgments

Dharmada collections are not taxable income of the assessee if they are genuinely meant for and spent on charitable purposes, or if they are voluntary contributions not accruing to the assessee's own benefit.

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation
278 ITR 152 · 2005 · High Court
42
citing judgments

For charitable trusts claiming Section 11 exemption, Section 68 concerning cash credits does not apply to donations received. The non-submission or non-production of donor details does not automatically lead to an inference that the trust is introducing unaccounted money.

CIT v. National Association of Software & Services Companies
345 ITR 362 · 2012 · High Court
40
citing judgments

A one-time fee paid by members, with the understanding that it can only be used for capital purposes, is considered a corpus donation and is not taxable as income. This is especially true when separate fees are collected for services rendered.

DIT v. Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram
357 ITR 731 · 2013 · High Court
35
citing judgments

Donations made for a specific purpose are considered capital in nature and cannot be applied for charitable or religious purposes, thus not being deemed income from property for the purposes of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

Judgments citing corpus donation

ITO (E), New Delhi vs. M/S Chadha Education Society, Delhi

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

ITA 91/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Baldev Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Doi, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 133(6)

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the corpus donation of Rs. 56,25,000/- are voluntary in nature without appreciating the fact that he donors had categorically stated that they were told to make donation ... concerns also run schools in Rohini and Pitampura. The assessee has earned Rs 2,19,86,513/- from its educational activities beside receiving a corpus donation of Rs 56,25,000/-. It has expended Rs 2,88,23,445/- on the objects of the Trust. The major portion of expenditure

Geriatric Wellness Foundation, Pune vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 1346/PUN/2023[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri S.S. Godarageriatric Wellness Foundation Cit (Exemption), Pune Lokmanya Hospital, Mitramandal Vs. 484/6, Mitramandal Colony, Parvati, Pune – 411009 Pan : Aafcg8051M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Agiwal Department By : Shri Keyur Patel, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 24-04-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-06-2024 O R D E R Per R. K. Panda, Vp :

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR
Section 12A

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration on the ground that Corpus donation received is not routed Income & Expenditure A/c and holding that documents about identity of the doner has not been submitted

M/S Tamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions, Wrd-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1098/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S. Thamizhvel P T Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, (Exemptions), Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1097/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S. Thamizhvel P T Rajan Commemoration Trust, Mylapore vs. ITO, (Exemptions) Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1096/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO(Exemptions) Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1095/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoratiuon Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1094/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions, Wrd-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1093/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Tamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoratiuon Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions, Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1092/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Tamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemmoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions, Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1091/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO(Exemptions) Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1090/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Thamizhel Ptp Rajan, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer(Exemptions), Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1089/CHNY/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO(Exemptions), Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1088/CHNY/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, (Exemptions)Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1087/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

main activity. 13. In the case before us, the CIT(E) has received petitions regarding tax evasion by the assessee. The assessee was receiving corpus donation in the guise of letting out the community hall to the poor people. This fact was disclosed in the return filed by the assessee ... assessee was in receipt of income from PT Rajan Hall Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai. The assessee was also found to be in receipt of corpus donation. 2.2 The assessee’s registered office premises at Chennai as well as Kalyana Mandapam at Madurai was inspected on 08-01-2016 wherein

Iilm Education Trust, Gurgaon vs. DCIT (Exemptions Circle 2), Chandigarh

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

ITA 227/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12A

already included in the gross receipts declared by the appellant, thus resulting in double addition. Re: Addition on account o f building received as corpus donation (without prejudice) ITA 227/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2014-15 3 4. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming addition of Rs.4 ... erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that aforesaid receipt of donation is. in any case, in the nature of corpus donation and hence not liable to tax under the provisions of the Act. 4.3. That the CIT(A)/ assessing officer erred on facts

Jan Swasthya Sahyog, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle, Exempt 1(1), Delhi

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

ITA 2336/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: the Ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT(A) relied upon the amended provisions of section 11(1)(d) of the Act and confirmed the addition made by the AO (CPC).

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

NFAC has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.1,00,00,000/- on account of corpus donation received during the year treating the same as income from other sources. (ii) That the above said addition has been confirmed ignoring the fact that the corpus

Gundecha Charities, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), Delhi

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 191/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya,CAFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishore Dhule – CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

against the principal of natural justice. 2. The Ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the deduction of Rs.38,79,472/- towards the corpus donation to the other trust as evident from the computation sheet in spite of no specific disallowances made in the order and the assessment was completed without

Om Kothari Foundation, Jaipur, Rajasthan vs. ITO, (Exemption) Ward-1, Jaipur, Rajasthan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 57/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anish Maheshwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl.CIT
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 164(2)

well as Ld. CIT(A), are wrong in not allowing the depreciation on those Assets which were not acquired by corpus donation or the Capital Assets claimed. To this effect, the ld AR of the assessee relied upon following decisions 1. 18 Taxman.com (104) Delhi ITAT. 2. GRR charities ... mentioning in his order that the trust lost benefit of sec. 13(1)(d) and the receipt in the form of Corpus donation was made taxable which is totally wrong and thus the addition is without any discussion which may kindly be deleted. However, the ld CIT(A) upheld

Annai Velankanni Educational and Social Society, Cuddalore vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 1278/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1278/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. Stay Application No.25/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.1278/Chny/2024) (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Annai Velankanni Educational & Dcit (Exemptions) बनाम/ Social Society Chennai-34. Angucherry Palayam, Panruti Vs. Cuddalore-607 106. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabta-9910-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi (Advocate)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22-05-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] On 15-03-2024 In The Matter Of Penalty Levied By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] Of Rs.41.40 Lacs U/S 270A Of The Act Allegedly For Under-Reporting Of Income Vide Order Dated 26-

For Appellant: Ms. N.V. Lakshmi (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 270(9)Section 270A

records, our adjudication would be as under. 2. Facts leading to impugned penalty are that during assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee donated corpus donation of Rs.67 Lacs to another trust which was treated as application of income for charitable purposes. The Ld. AO, invoking Explanation-2 to Sec.11 ... forthcoming from assessee, Ld. AO imposed penalty of Rs.41.40 Lacs. 3. During appellate proceedings, the assessee, inter-alia, submitted that denial of application of corpus donation do not give rise to any taxable income in the hands of the assessee and therefore, no penalty could be levied. However

ITO(E)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Bhavitha Foundation, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4766/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: 28/05/2024
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)

selected for scrutiny assessment for filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment for verification of the large corpus verification of the large corpus donation received by the assessee. received by the assessee. The statutory notices under the Income The statutory notices under the Income ... assessee the Act. The facts qua the issue in dispute are that the assessee received 5,00,000 equity shares of Majesco Ltd. as corpus donation. eceived 5,00,000 equity shares of Majesco Ltd. as corpus donation. eceived 5,00,000 equity shares of Majesco Ltd. as corpus donation