“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

M/S. Care Foundation, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1005/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 143(3)

application of income. The ld. AO also observed that source of acquisition of capital assets in earlier years could be out of – (a) corpus fund /corpus donation – in such a case, the receipt itself is not included in the income of the entity. 3 M/s. Care Foundation (b) accumulation

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Sri Basaveshwar Veerashaiva Vidyavardhak Sangha, Bagalkote

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 66/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Sri Basaveshwar Veerashaiva Vidyavardhak Sangha, Bagalkote

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 65/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Sri Basaveshwar Veerashaiva Vidyavardhak Sangha, Bagalkote

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 64/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. Sri V C Charantimath, Bagalkot

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 236/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. Sri.V.C.Charantimath, Bagalkot

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 235/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Sri. Basaveshwar Veerashaiva Vidyavardhak Sangha, Bagalkote

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 234/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Sri Basaveshwar Veerashaiva Vidyavardhak Sagha, Bagalkot vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 2777/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Sri Basaveshwar Veerashaiva Vidyavardhak Sangha, Bagalkot vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 2776/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Sri Basaveshwar Veershaiva Vidyavardhak Sangha, Bagalkot vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 2775/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

ITA Nos.2775, 2776 & 2777/Bang/2017 ITA Nos.64, 65 & 66/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.235 & 236/Bang/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

DCIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3650/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

scheme for promotion of investment in Agricultural and Rural sector. (ii) The scheme has been set up within the assessee herein. (iii) Initial corpus fund for WDF has been contributed by the assessee, MoA and GOI. The details of contribution made for TDF is not available. Contribution

C.B. Mubarka Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 638/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhc.B. Murarka Charitable Vs. Cit(Exemption) Trust, B-310, Virwani 617, 6Th Floor, Piramal Industrial Estate, Chamber, Lal Baug, Parel Western Express Mumbai - 400012 Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai – 400063 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaatc0036C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sanjay C. ShahFor Respondent: Sandeep Rai

Section 143(3)Section 263

finalized on 01.12.2018. Subsequently, the ld. Pr. CIT on verification of the assessment record observed that assessee had made excess expenditure from corpus fund resulted in deficit amounting to Rs.4,31,94,050/-. The Pr.CIT stated that such expenditure claimed from corpus donation was not allowable. In this regard ... referred page no. 178 & 179 of the paper book giving the ITA No.638/Mum/2021 A.Y.2016-17 4 C.B. Murarka Charitable Trust Vs. CIT (Exemption) detail of corpus fund. He also referred page No. 91 of the paper book a copy of annexure of notice u/s 142(1) issued by the A.O wherein

Saifee Burhani Upliftment Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2016 – 17 is partly allowed with above direction

ITA 590/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Chimanlal

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 263

view that any fund coming to the trust fund or shown as a trust fund itself cannot be treated as a corpus donation or corpus fund. Therefore, the nature of the trust fund as it comes from the definition of the same, its utilization and other surrounding facts and circumstances

Saifee Bujhani Upliftment Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2016 – 17 is partly allowed with above direction

ITA 589/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Chimanlal

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 263

Harish H. Gandhi, Mumbai vs. ACIT- 33 (1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2603/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43C

expenses for obtaining such Connections - Rs.25,000/- vi) Towards proportionate share of development Charges and other charges of service charges - Rs.78,925/- vii) Towards corpus fund for up-keep and maintenance And facilities - Rs.1,03,320/- viii) Towards club house charges - Rs.1,50,000/- Total Rs.3

Harish H. Gandhi, Mumbai vs. ACIT-33(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1244/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43C

Axis Bank Foundation, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal is allowed

ITA 892/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak

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

further submitted that the Appellant had actually incurred aggregate expenditure of INR 65.75 Crores towards the objects of the trust from the general corpus funds available with the Appellant since the contribution of INR 63,21,92,771/- had to be kept in escrow account on account of pending FCRA

The Mysore City Police Welfare Trust, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Mysore

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

ITA 1549/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(15)

this appeal before the ITAT. The assessee has filed a paper book enclosing therein details of the hall rent, copy of the details for corpus fund, copy of the building donations, sample copies of cash receipts, the case laws relied on, the written submissions filed 4 ITA Nos.1547-1549/Bang/2018. M/s.Mysore City ... assessee-trust was not registered u/s 12A of the I.T.Act. 7.2 In the instant case, the assessee has furnished the details of the corpus fund, details of funds for donation for annexe building, sample cash receipts for receipt of 5 ITA Nos.1547-1549/Bang/2018. M/s.Mysore City Police Welfare Trust. donations, copies

The Mysore City Police Welfare Trust, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Mysore

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

ITA 1548/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(15)

Mysore City Police Welfare Trust, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Mysore

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

ITA 1547/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(15)