“corpus fund”

Charitable TrustsSection 11(1)(d)Section 11(1)(d)337 judgments

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

Leading authorities on corpus fund

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

228 ITR 620 · 1997 · High Court

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).

CIT v. Bijli Cotton Mills (P) Ltd.

116 ITR 60 · 1979 · Supreme Court

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

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. Halai Namon Association (

330 ITR 24 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

Profits generated from activities for the advancement of a general public utility (GPU) do not automatically qualify for exemption under Section 11 if the GPU is carried on as a business. Even if business profits are reinvested into charitable activities, the exemption under Section 11 will not be available.

New Life in Christ Evangelistic Association v. CIT

246 ITR 532 · 2000 · High Court

citing judgments

Before registration is granted under section 12AA, all voluntary contributions, even those designated as corpus funds, are considered income of the charitable or religious trust.

CIT v. Trustees of Kasturbai Scindia Commission Trust

189 ITR 5 · 1991 · High Court

citing judgments

Voluntary contributions specifically received towards the corpus of a trust cannot be brought to tax as income. Funds created for specific objectives remain capital funds and are not to be pooled with normal income.

Provat Kumar Mitter v. CIT

41 ITR 624 · 1961 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Receipts stand diverted by an overriding title where an obligation to pay an amount is attached to the very source of income, rather than being a mere application of income.

Judgments citing corpus fund

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

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

ITA 59/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

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)

also erred in not considering the ground of the Assessee. 9. That the Ld. A.O. grossly erred in making addition of corpus fund Rs. 35,29,000.00. That the Ld. CIT(A) also erred in not considering the ground of the Assessee. 10. That the Ld. A.O. grossly erred ... That the Ld. CIT(A) also erred in not allowing the ground. 9. That the Id. A.O. grossly erred in making addition of corpus fund Rs. 283000/- That the Ld. CIT(A) also erred in not considering the ground of the Assessee.”’ ITA No.59/JP/2024 — A.Y. 2014-15 1. That

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)

Yusuf Meherally Centre, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exem), Ward-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 108/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: ShriDr. Kishore Dhule CITDR

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

denying the exemption u/s. 11 (l)(d) of the Act amounting to Rs. 45,750/-, comprising of - (i) Total life membership fees transferred to corpus fund of Rs. 43,050/-; (ii) Total collection at donation box kept at Bapu Kuti Complex of Rs. 2,700/- . 12.2 It is submitted that

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)

received on the shares the dividend received on the shares, which were received by the which were received by the assessee as donation towards corpus fund tion towards corpus fund, could also be treated as could also be treated as part of corpus fund or to be treated as income ... assessee which part of corpus fund or to be treated as income of the assessee which part of corpus fund or to be treated as income of the assessee which was to be applied or invested as per the provisions of section 11 of applied or invested

Shri Chandraprabhu Maharaj Digamber Jain Mandir Trust, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions) Ward 1(1), Pune

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

ITA 672/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav K Singh

Section 11Section 115Section 12ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

under: “5.3.1 In the instant case, the appellant is a charitable trust, claimed interest income as exempt u/s.11 of the Act not the corpus funds. An organization can accumulate 15 per cent of its income indefinitely. In other words upto 15 of income can be transferred to the corpus every

Viswamanava Samaikyata Samsat, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer(Exemptions), Guntur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 278/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 278/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2014-15) M/S. Viswamanava Samikyata Vs. Income Tax Officer Samsat, Guntur. (Exemptions), Pan: Aaatv 1597 P Guntur. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02/04/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 28/05/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148

clear direction from the donor to treat the amount donated as a specific direction towards corpus donation in order to build the corpus fund for the running of VMSS activities in the long run. It is clear from the letter that the intention of the donor ... corpus fund 5 in long run. We give below the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) which reads as under: “The appellant submitted that the substance needs to be looked into and would form the basis for conclusion about the nature of DONATIONS. The appellant placed reliance

Gyudmed Tantric University Society, Mysuru vs. Income-Tax, Exemptions Ward, Mysore

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

ITA 939/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri G Venkatesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 139(1)

before the ld. CIT(A). 6. The assessee before the ld. CIT(A) submitted that the amount received by the assessee was representing the corpus fund, which was marked in the form of FD with the resolution that interest from such fixed deposit will not be used

DCIT(E), Circle-1(1), New Delhi vs. Indian Grameen Services, New Delhi

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

ITA 104/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(2)(a)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 25

vide registration dated 19.08.1987. The assessee has its corporate office at Surabhi Arcade, Hyderabad which was purchased out of part of corpus fund provided by Swiss Agency for Development and Corporation (SDC). 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had rented

Vasantarao Sanas Education Society, Pune vs. ITO, Exemption Ward 1(1), Pune

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

ITA 346/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 May 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

No.346/PUN/2024, AY 2017-18 Rs.14,00,000/- it was contended that the cash was deposited out of cash withdrawals from the bank and corpus fund received from trustee of the trust. On 26.09.2019 the Ld. AR of the assessee furnished salary (paid) sheet

Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana Trust, Khambhat vs. The ITO, Ward (Exemption), Vadodara

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

ITA 227/AHD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana Income-Tax Officer, Trust, Ward (Exemption), 1, Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana, Vadodara Opp. Bus Stand, Khambhat, Gujarat-388620 Pan : Aaatd 2007 L अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Ankit Chokshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03.05.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta:

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Chokshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr DR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12(1)Section 12ASection 250

assessee has referred to various decisions of the ITAT and hon’ble High Courts in support of his claim of exemption of corpus funds utilized for charitable purposes u/s 11(1)(a) of the Act. He also contended that it is only with effect from 01-04-22, that

DCIT, Central Circle, Noida vs. Pgp Charitable Trust, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 471/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 12ASection 132Section 153C

additions were made by the A. O. on the basis of seized document. A.O. made addition of disallowance of donation received in the corpus fund for which, no documents were found and seized in search action. Thus, seized document has no co- relation by any stretch of imagination

DCIT, Central Circle, Noida vs. Pgp Charitable Trust, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 470/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 12ASection 132Section 153C

Madhav Prasad Priyamvada Birla Apex Charitable Trust, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Exemption, Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 536/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 536/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Madhav Prasad Priyamvada Birla Apex Charitable Trust,.……………………..….Appellant Birla Building, 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aaatm7631F] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….…….Respondent Ward-1(4), Exemptions, Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S. Datta, Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 09, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 09, 2024 O R D E R

Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 44A

circumstances of the case, the CPC, Bengaluru was incorrect in adding the sum of Rs.99,28,000/- donated by way of corpus fund to other trust, to the taxable income of the assessee trust. (b) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CPC failed

Gloster Ltd(Formerly Known As Kettlewell Bullen & Co. Ltd, Kolkata vs. PCIT-2, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 519/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 263Section 40Section 74

under a pension scheme referred to in section 80CCD; (ix) the contribution made by the Central government in the previous year, to the Agniveer Corpus Fund account of an individual enrolled in the Agnipath Scheme referred to in section 80CCH.” (emphasis supplied by us by underline) 4.2. Ld. Counsel also