← All Phrases

“Section 13(1)(d)”

Section References (mined)Section 13Section 13(1)(d)190 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 13(1)(d) is CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions (363 ITR 230), cited in 117 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 13(1)(d)

CIT v. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions
363 ITR 230 · 2014 · High Court
117
citing judgments

For a charitable trust, a violation of Section 13(1)(d) does not lead to the denial of exemption under Section 11 on its total income. Instead, only income derived from investments or deposits made in violation of Section 11(5) or income diverted under Section 13(1)(c) or 13(1)(d) is taxable.

CIT v. Tiny Tots Education Society
330 ITR 21 · 2011 · High Court
112
citing judgments

Charitable institutions are entitled to claim depreciation on assets even when the cost of acquisition has already been treated as an application of income for exemption purposes, as this does not constitute a double deduction.

1. Father Mullers Charitable Institutions 363 IT 230 (Kar.) 2. DIT(E) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust
249 ITR 533 · 2001 · High Court
108
citing judgments

Income of a trust that is taxable at the maximum marginal rate should be taxed accordingly, while other income is eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa
309 ITR 329 · 2009 · High Court
97
citing judgments

For exemption under Section 54, the expression 'a residential house' allows for investment in multiple residential units that form one functional unit, as 'a' does not imply a singular number. The amendment to Section 54, effective from April 1, 2015, is prospective.

DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse
259 ITR 280 · 2003 · Supreme Court
86
citing judgments

Violation of investment mandates under Section 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a charitable trust results in the complete denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Act.

Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) v. DGIT (Exemptions)
358 ITR 91 · 2013 · High Court
80
citing judgments

An institution carrying out charitable objects, such as education or advancement of general public utility, does not lose its Section 11 exemption merely by collecting fees for activities like campus placements or educational guidance, as this does not constitute carrying on a business.

National Petroleum Construction Company v. DIT
383 ITR 648 · 2016 · High Court
69
citing judgments

An Indian agent providing marketing services, without the authority to conclude contracts on behalf of a foreign company, does not constitute a Dependent Agent Permanent Establishment (DAPE) for the foreign company in India under DTAA provisions.

Linde AG, Linde Engineering Division v. DDIT
365 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
55
citing judgments

When contractual obligations are for an entire project, only the income reasonably attributable to operations carried on in India is deemed to accrue or arise in India and falls within the tax net. This principle applies even in consortium arrangements where members have broader contractual roles, and income from supply of equipment should be characterized appropriately.

Judgments citing Section 13(1)(d)

Hyderabad Science Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Exemption Circle 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1128/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1128/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Hyderabad Science Society, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Vs. Pin - 500 028. Exemption Circle-1(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaath3789F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca For Revenue : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)

case of any violation under Section 13. The amended Section 12AB(4) does not consider a violation of Section 13(1)(c) and Section 13(1)(d) as specified violations. Consequently, the registration cannot be cancelled on the ground that the assessee has violated Section 13(1)(c) or Section

Richmond Educational Society, Noida vs. DCIT/ACIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad

ITA 4779/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

dated 6-7-1984 wherein they had stated that the legal precedents that were rendered in the context of violation of provisions of section 13(1)(d) of the Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c ) of the Act also. This was rendered ... very clear with regard to grant of exemption under section 11 of the Act in the event of violation of provisions of section 13(1)(d) of the Act, wherein only such part of the violation would be denied exemption under section 11 of the Act and not the complete

DCIT Central Circle 7 (1), Mumbai vs. Dr D Y Patil Educational Academy, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2289/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 12ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 250

inference is drawn on an alleged receipt of donation and consequently, the allegation is made that there is a violation of section 13(1)(d) of the Act. A hypothetical finding is given that because capitation fee is charged, it is not an income in terms of section ... therefore, there is a violation of section 13(1)(d) of the Act. The Tribunal held that such a reasoning cannot be accepted because if the donations are offered for income and if the department wants to disprove the nature of income on the basis of material, as has been

DCIT Central Circle 7 (1), Mumbai vs. Dr D Y Patil Educational Academy, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2251/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 12ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 250

inference is drawn on an alleged receipt of donation and consequently, the allegation is made that there is a violation of section 13(1)(d) of the Act. A hypothetical finding is given that because capitation fee is charged, it is not an income in terms of section ... therefore, there is a violation of section 13(1)(d) of the Act. The Tribunal held that such a reasoning cannot be accepted because if the donations are offered for income and if the department wants to disprove the nature of income on the basis of material, as has been

Ramkrishna Bajaj Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 26(1), Mumbai

ITA 6544/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv. & MrFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 35ASection 80

donations paid/granted. 2.3. It is submitted that the considering the non-compliance with the provisions of Section 11(5) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Act, the Appellant did not claim the benefits of Section 11&12 of the Act. Accordingly, the Appellant is fully justified

Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward-3, Bengaluru vs. Sarakki Educational Society, Bengaluru

ITA 1992/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 250

ITA Nos.1973, 1974, 1991 & 1992/Bang/2024 M/s. Sarakki Educational Society, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE

Income Tax Officer, Exemptions, Ward-3, Bengaluru vs. Sarakki Education Society, Bengaluru

ITA 1991/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 250

ITA Nos.1973, 1974, 1991 & 1992/Bang/2024 M/s. Sarakki Educational Society, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE

M/S. Sarakki Educational Society, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(Exemtions), Bangalore

ITA 1974/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 250

ITA Nos.1973, 1974, 1991 & 1992/Bang/2024 M/s. Sarakki Educational Society, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE

M/S. Sarakki Educational Society, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -3 (Exemptions), Bangalore

ITA 1973/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 250

ITA Nos.1973, 1974, 1991 & 1992/Bang/2024 M/s. Sarakki Educational Society, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE

Sheth Chimanlal Govinddas Memorial Trust, Pune vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1224/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2020-21
Section 11Section 12ASection 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263

taxmann.com 275 dated 10.02.2014 has held as under : “11. With regard to second and third substantial questions of law are concerned, reading of Section 13(1)(d) ofthe Act makes it clear that it is only the income from such investment or deposit which has been made inviolation of Section ... that is liable to be taxed and that violation under Section 13(1)(d) doesnot tantamount to denial of exemption under Section 11 on the total income of the assessee. Reading of the proviso to Section 142 is very clear that the legislature has clearly contemplated that in a case

Shri Narendra Charitable Trust, Delhi vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 3, Delhi

In the result, the assessees’ appeals are allowed

ITA 253/DEL/2025[2014-15 and Further Year]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025
Section 120Section 127Section 12ASection 143Section 3

d) as specified violations. Consequently, the registration cannot be cancelled on the ground that the assessee has violated Section 13(l)(c) or Section 13(1)(d). 8.1.10 The Finance Act 2023 has inserted clause (g) in Explanation to Section 12AB(4) to provide that giving incomplete, false, or inaccurate

Shakuntalam Educational Society East Delhi, New Delhi vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)- 3, Delhi

In the result, the assessees’ appeals are allowed

ITA 252/DEL/2025[2013-14 and Further Years]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025
Section 120Section 127Section 12ASection 143Section 3

d) as specified violations. Consequently, the registration cannot be cancelled on the ground that the assessee has violated Section 13(l)(c) or Section 13(1)(d). 8.1.10 The Finance Act 2023 has inserted clause (g) in Explanation to Section 12AB(4) to provide that giving incomplete, false, or inaccurate

Adarsh Shiv Shakti Shiksha Samiti, Delhi vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 3, Delhi

In the result, the assessees’ appeals are allowed

ITA 218/DEL/2025[2013-14 and further years]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025
Section 120Section 127Section 12ASection 143Section 3

d) as specified violations. Consequently, the registration cannot be cancelled on the ground that the assessee has violated Section 13(l)(c) or Section 13(1)(d). 8.1.10 The Finance Act 2023 has inserted clause (g) in Explanation to Section 12AB(4) to provide that giving incomplete, false, or inaccurate

Presidium Educational & Charitable Trust, Delhi vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 3, Delhi

In the result, the assessees’ appeals are allowed

ITA 216/DEL/2025[2012-13 and further year]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025
Section 120Section 127Section 12ASection 143Section 3

d) as specified violations. Consequently, the registration cannot be cancelled on the ground that the assessee has violated Section 13(l)(c) or Section 13(1)(d). 8.1.10 The Finance Act 2023 has inserted clause (g) in Explanation to Section 12AB(4) to provide that giving incomplete, false, or inaccurate

Divine Educational and Charitable Trust, Delhi vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 3, Delhi

In the result, the assessees’ appeals are allowed

ITA 215/DEL/2025[2014-15 and further years]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025
Section 120Section 127Section 12ASection 143Section 3

d) as specified violations. Consequently, the registration cannot be cancelled on the ground that the assessee has violated Section 13(l)(c) or Section 13(1)(d). 8.1.10 The Finance Act 2023 has inserted clause (g) in Explanation to Section 12AB(4) to provide that giving incomplete, false, or inaccurate

Nathaneil Junior Education Society, Delhi vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 3, Delhi

In the result, the assessees’ appeals are allowed

ITA 214/DEL/2025[2014-15 and Further Years]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025
Section 120Section 127Section 12ASection 143Section 3

d) as specified violations. Consequently, the registration cannot be cancelled on the ground that the assessee has violated Section 13(l)(c) or Section 13(1)(d). 8.1.10 The Finance Act 2023 has inserted clause (g) in Explanation to Section 12AB(4) to provide that giving incomplete, false, or inaccurate

Scholars Education Trust of India, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1225/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT
Section 10Section 10(23)(vi)Section 11(5)Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 153(5)Section 2(41)

incomes which are applied for its objectives. Therefore, it is an incorrect standof the assessee. However, we find that a careful perusal of Section 13(1)(d), 13(1)(c), 13(2) and 13(3), it will reveal that the status of the Institution cannot be changed from 'charitable ... worthy of making an addition. However, even otherwise there is no there is no violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) and section 13(1)(d) of the Act, as the said provisions are attracted in relation to trustees of the trust. The aforesaid property transaction is with

Maya Kumari, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 581/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Nov 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 69

that said company is a specified person of assessee-According to Assessing Officer, assessee is hit by Section 13(1)(c)(ii) and Section 13(1)(d) for such reason assessment was reopened under Section 147—Assessing Officer observed that from impugned documents it was seen that assessee had deposited

Katrathal Gram Sewa Sahkari Samiti Limited, Katrathal vs. ITO Ward 1 Sikar, Sikar

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1001/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 151Section 234ASection 250

that said company is a specified person of assessee— According to Assessing Officer, assessee is hit by Section 13(1)(c)(ii) and Section 13(1)(d) for such reason assessment was reopened under Section 147—Assessing Officer observed that from impugned documents it was seen that assessee had deposited

M/S. Vijayanagar Educational Trust, Bengaluru vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Bengaluru

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2006/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Hariprasad Nayak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 115TSection 12ASection 13Section 133A

benefit of the trust, the repayment of the loan was made out of the trust funds, thus it violates the provisions of section 13(1)(d) of the Act. The ld. CIT(E) held that as it is not shown that the fund is used for the benefit ... never transferred to the trust and therefore this transaction was for the personal benefit of the trustee, hence it violates the provisions of section 13(1)(d) of the Act. The ld. The ld. CIT(E) relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case