← All Phrases

“Section 13(1)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 13Section 13(1)(b)140 judgments

SHRI SURTI MODH VANIK JAGRUTI MANDAL,MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, MUMBAI

ITA 8229/MUM/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2026-27

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(b)Section 80G

violation of grounds of natural justice for reasons best known to him. 7. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption) erred in applying section 13(1)(b) while cancelling registration, ignoring factual position that the assessee trust had not spent any amount for the particular Gnyati or caste. " “1 ... violation of grounds of natural justice for reasons best known to him. 7. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(exemption) erred in applying section 13(1)(b) while cancelling registration, ignoring factual position that the assessee trust had not spent any amount for the particular Gnyati or caste.” 2. Briefly

SHRI SURTI MODH VANIK JAGRUTI MANDAL,MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, MUMBAI

ITA 8227/MUM/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2026-27

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(b)Section 80G

violation of grounds of natural justice for reasons best known to him. 7. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption) erred in applying section 13(1)(b) while cancelling registration, ignoring factual position that the assessee trust had not spent any amount for the particular Gnyati or caste. " “1 ... violation of grounds of natural justice for reasons best known to him. 7. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(exemption) erred in applying section 13(1)(b) while cancelling registration, ignoring factual position that the assessee trust had not spent any amount for the particular Gnyati or caste.” 2. Briefly

GLOBAL COUNCIL OF ZOROASTRIANS TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

ITA 4930/MUM/2025[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(b)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

would be in violation of Section 11 of the Act; b. the objects allegedly benefit a particular religious community, attracting the provisions of Section 13(1)(b); 4. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The Ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the approach adopted ... further submitted that the mere fact that the trust’s objects refer to a particular community does not automatically attract Section 13(1)(b) at the stage of registration. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dawoodi Bohara Jamat

GLOBAL COUNCIL OF ZOROASTRIANS TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

ITA 4928/MUM/2025[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(b)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

would be in violation of Section 11 of the Act; b. the objects allegedly benefit a particular religious community, attracting the provisions of Section 13(1)(b); 4. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The Ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the approach adopted ... further submitted that the mere fact that the trust’s objects refer to a particular community does not automatically attract Section 13(1)(b) at the stage of registration. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dawoodi Bohara Jamat

THE JAIN KASAR SAMAJ SANSTHA,SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is devoid of merits and the\nsame is hereby dismissed

ITA 2613/PUN/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2025AY 2024-2025
For Appellant: \nN O N EFor Respondent: \nShri Udaya Bhaskar Jakke
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

caste\nwhich is a specific violation under clauses [c] and (d) to Explanation to\nSection 12AB(4) of the Act.\n7. 2. Further section 13[1][b] of the Act exclude the benefit of section 11\nand 12 to a charitable institution created or established after\ncоmmеnсеment ... Supreme\nCourt in the case of CIT vs Dawoodi Bohara Jamat reported in 43\ntaxmann.com 243, held that the provision of section 13(1)(b) of the Act\nis applicable even to a composite trust/ institution having both\nreligious and charitable objects, by observing as follows:\n\"... 45. From

THE JAIN KASAR SAMAJ SANSTHA,SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is devoid of merits and the\nsame is hereby dismissed

ITA 2612/PUN/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2025AY 2024-2025
For Appellant: \nΝΟΝΕFor Respondent: \nShri Udaya Bhaskar Jakke
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

caste\nwhich is a specific violation under clauses [c] and (d) to Explanation to\nSection 12AB(4) of the Act.\n7. 2. Further section 13[1][b] of the Act exclude the benefit of section 11\nand 12 to a charitable institution created or established after\ncоmmеnсеment ... Supreme\nCourt in the case of CIT vs Dawoodi Bohara Jamat reported in 43\ntaxmann.com 243, held that the provision of section 13(1)(b) of the Act\nis applicable even to a composite trust/ institution having both\nreligious and charitable objects, by observing as follows:\n\"... 45. From

SHRI BHAVNAGAR DASHASHRIMALI KANTHIBANDH (VAISHNAV) VANIK GNATI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 135/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, AR
Section 12ASection 14Section 253(5)

said caste, and the trust was therefore created for the benefit of a particular caste or community. Referring to the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act, the CIT(E) held that exemption under sections 11 and 12 cannot be allowed to any trust established after ... even where a trust pursues charitable purposes but restricts the benefit to members of a particular religious community or caste, the provisions of section 13(1)(b) are attracted. Consequently, the learned CIT(E) held that the assessee was not eligible for registration under section 12AB and cancelled the earlier

SHRI BHAVNAGAR DASHASHRIMALI KANTHIBANDH (VAISHNAV) VANIK GNATI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 134/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025
For Appellant: \nShri Mohit Balani, ARFor Respondent: \nShri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 14Section 253(5)

said caste, and the trust was\ntherefore created for the benefit of a particular caste or community.\nReferring to the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act, the CIT(E) held that\nexemption under sections 11 and 12 cannot be allowed to any trust\nestablished after ... assessee-trust are primarily intended for the\nbenefit of a particular caste or religious community, namely Kanthibandh\n(Vaishnav) Vanik Gnati, invoking section 13(1)(b) of the Act. The AR\ncontended that such an approach is impermissible at the stage of\nregistration under section 12A/12AB, as the provisions

ARHAMGACHCHH STHANAKVASI JAIN SAMPRADAY TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 409/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.409/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : Na Arhamgachchh Sthanakvasi The Cit (Exemption) बनाम/ Jain Sampraday Trust Vejalpur 380 015 V/S. 1, Paras Chambers, Opp. Sagar Hotel Nr. Ujala Circle, Sarkhej Ahmedabad – 382 210 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaeta 9012 C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kamal Bhambhani, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.P. Rastogi, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 24/12/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Bhambhani, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 250

Seva Trust v. CIT (Exemption) [2025] 173 taxmann.com 263 (Ahmedabad-Trib.), which held that for trusts created prior to 01.04.2021, the applicability of section 13(1)(b) is a matter for assessment and not for denying registration under section 12AB of the Act. 5.1. Accordingly, the counsel submitted that

SHREE MADHAPAR JAIN SAMAJ,MADHAPAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 218/RJT/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Nov 2025

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.218/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: Na Shree Madhapar Jain Samaj Cit (Exemption) बनाम Shri Aayambil Shala Junavas Ahmedabad Madhapar, Bhuj, Gujarat-370020 Vs. Pan : Aayts4000N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Darshak Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Pallavi, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(b)

ITA No.218/Rjt/2024 Shree Madhapar Jain Samaj vs. CIT(E) 1 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE

MAYA KUMARI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), JAIPUR, 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

taxed separately at Maximum\nMarginal Rate in terms of proviso to Section_164(2)—Total amount was treated as\nincome by invoking Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 11(5)—Amount said to have\nreceived as donation was added back to income of assessee under Section

SHREE MAHYAVANSHI SAMAJ BOMBAY TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4920/MUM/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2026-27

Bench: Shri Beena Pillai & Smt.Renu Jauhrishree Mahyavanshi Samaj Vs. Cit Exemption Bombay Trust Pratishita Bhavan, New 91E, Madhav Bhuvan, Marine Lines, 21/22, N M Joshi Marg, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aakpb0134E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad- CIT DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13Section 13(1)(b)Section 80G

application. 3. The Learned CIT(Exemption) Mumbai erred in stating the order of rejection dated 24-6-2025 that the assessee had violated section 13(1)(b) without appreciating that the said provision is not applicable to assessee trust as it was for the benefit of schedule castes, backward classes ... Trust has neither offered any comment on delay in filing application in Form 10AB nor did it offer any comments on violation of section 13(1)(b) of the Act and violation as per clause (d) of explanation to section 12AB(4) of the Act owing to the activities favouring

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

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

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर\r\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, \"SMC\" JAIPUR\r

ANANDABAVA SEVA SANSTHA GAUSHALA TRUST JAMNAGAR,JAMNAGAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 31/RJT/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 31/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2024-25) (Hybrid Hearing) Anandbava Seva Sanstha Gaushala Trust, The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Gopal Bhuvan No, Anandbava Chakalo, Tax (E), Jamnagar 361001 Ahmedabad 380015 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaata2817K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 2(15)Section 80(5)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

both charitable and religious were not exclusively meant for a particular religious community, then it would not fall under the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act and it was further held that where the assessee was charitable and religious trust, which did not benefit any specific religious ... community and hence, it could not be held that the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act would be the Act. The relevant observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court are as under: - Anandabava Seva Sanstha Gaushala Trust attracted to the assessee trust and therefore, it would

HAJI PIR MOHMAD YUSUF WAQF,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1326/SRT/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1326/Srt/2024 (Hybrid Hearing) Haji Pir Mohmad Yusuf Waqf Commissioner Of Income-Tax बनाम/ Chowk Bazar, Surat- 395 003 (Exemption), Ahmedabad-380 015 Vs. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacth 6551 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 30/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 15/10/2025

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(b)Section 2(15)

alleviation of Muslim community. He submitted that Section 11 does not apply to the case of the appellant, which is clearly spelt in Section 13(1)(b) of the Act. He, therefore, argued that the order 3 Haji Pir Mohmad Yusuf Waqf of Ld.CIT(E) is as per the provisions

SHREE JAIN SHEWATAMBER SANSTHAN,ARADHNA BHAWAN vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), WARD-I JAIPUR

ITA 340/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vimal Chopra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

conclusion that the assessee society was found not eligible to claim benefit u/s 11 of the Act, in view of provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, while denying benefit of sections 11 and 12 of the Act to the assessee society, the Assessing Officer passed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE,PUNE vs. SHRI MUKUND BHAVAN TRUST, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 829/PUN/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.829 & 827/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Dy. Commissioner Of Shri Mukund Bhavan Trust, Income Tax (Exemptions), 1105, Ravivar Peth, Pune-411002 Cirlce – Pune Vs. Pan : Aaats5170R अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assesseeby : Shri V.L. Jain Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 24-07-2025 Date Of 08-10-2025 Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 3

trust came into being in the year 1930 and was granted approval on 25.08.1975 and again on 24.09.2021. We find the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act read as under: “13(1)… (b) in the case of a trust for charitable purposes or a charitable institution created ... therefore, the Ld. CIT(E) in our opinion was not justified in holding that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act. Further, it is also an admitted fact that the trust was granted registration by the Commissioner

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE,PUNE vs. SHRI MUKUND BHAVAN TRUST, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 827/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.829 & 827/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Dy. Commissioner Of Shri Mukund Bhavan Trust, Income Tax (Exemptions), 1105, Ravivar Peth, Pune-411002 Cirlce – Pune Vs. Pan : Aaats5170R अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assesseeby : Shri V.L. Jain Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 24-07-2025 Date Of 08-10-2025 Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 3

trust came into being in the year 1930 and was granted approval on 25.08.1975 and again on 24.09.2021. We find the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act read as under: “13(1)… (b) in the case of a trust for charitable purposes or a charitable institution created ... therefore, the Ld. CIT(E) in our opinion was not justified in holding that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act. Further, it is also an admitted fact that the trust was granted registration by the Commissioner

AMRELI MODH VANIK COMMUNITY PROPERTY,AMRELI vs. THE PR. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 360/RJT/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.360/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2024-25 Amreli Modh Vanik Principal Commissioner Of Community Property बनाम Income-Tax(Exemption), Nr. Rajkamal Chowk, Amreli- /Vs. Ahmedabad, 365 601 Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Ayakar Bhawan (Vejalpur), Nr. Sacin Tower 100 Ft Road, Anandnagar Prahladnagar Road, Ahmedabad-3800 015 "थायीलेखासं /.जीआइआरसं . / Pan/Gir No.: Aagta 8104 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

benefit of public at large. Therefore, please clarify that as to how there is no contravention of provision of section 13(1)(b) of the Act. 3. Hence, you are requested to show cause as to why your application filed in Form 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) should ... preceding 3 years, if yes, furnish the copy of order. 10 State as to whether the objects are for any particular Provisions of section 13(1)((b) will not be applicable due caste, creed and religious community. to the reasons and brief notes mentioned in Annexure A mentioned

MSB EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. CIT(E) JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, this last objection also no more stands on its legs

ITA 155/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumarmsb Educational Society, Plot No. 1, Burhani Park, Ward No. 1, Ramnagar Nanta, Kota 324 008 Pan No. Aaqam 8644P ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Ankit Chokshi, CA, Ld. AR (thro. VC)For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Ojha, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 12ASection 17

since the object and purpose of the trust was confined only to a particular religious community, the same would attract the provisions of section 13(1)(b) and, therefore, prayer made for registration of the trust was declined. The Tribunal after going through the objects of the assessee- trust came ... assessee was a public religious trust as the objects of the trust were wholly religious in nature and thus, the provisions of section 13(1)(b) which were otherwise applicable in case of charitable trust would not be applicable. The Tribunal therefore, held that the assessee was entitled to claim

Showing 1–20 of 140 · Page 1 of 7