“Section 13(1)(b)”

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

The decision most relied on for Section 13(1)(b) is CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (310 ITR 320), cited in 259 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 13(1)(b)

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft

310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court

259

citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

Verizon Communications Singapore Pte Ltd. v. ITO

361 ITR 575 · 2014 · High Court

156

citing judgments

Payments for the use of equipment or copyrighted articles constitute royalty income under section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, necessitating TDS deduction under section 195 and attracting disallowance under section 40(a)(i) for non-compliance.

CIT v. K.G. Rukminiamma

331 ITR 211 · 2011 · High Court

104

citing judgments

For capital gains exemption under Sections 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act (prior to the 2015 amendment), the expression "a residential house" includes multiple residential units and should not be construed in the singular, by applying Section 13 of the General Clauses Act.

CIT v. Havells India Ltd.

352 ITR 376 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

For royalty income, especially in the context of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA), the 'source of income' is the determinative factor for taxability, rather than merely the 'source of receipt'.

CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat

364 ITR 31 · 2014 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A trust's objects, even if based on religious tenets, can qualify as charitable for tax exemptions if its benefits are not exclusively restricted to a particular religious community or caste.

CIT v. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association

140 ITR 1 · 1983 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

An object beneficial to a section of the public, as distinguished from an individual or group of individuals, qualifies as an object of general public utility under Section 2(15) and hence a charitable purpose. This applies even if the benefits are restricted to a specific caste, community, or professional group.

DCIT v. Welspun Corporation Ltd.

77 Taxmann.com 165 · 2017 · ITAT

citing judgments

Subscription fees received by a non-resident for information access do not constitute 'royalty' for the use of copyright under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case also elaborates on the scheme of taxability for non-residents under Section 5(2) of the Act, especially concerning income deemed to accrue or arise in India.

CIT v. Dawoodi Bohara Jamat

43 Taxmann.com 243 · 2014 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Section 13(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act applies to composite trusts that engage in both religious and charitable activities, meaning such trusts may be excluded from exemption under Section 11.

Judgments citing Section 13(1)(b)

Shri Verdhman Sthanakvasi Jain Shrisangh, Kota vs. CIT (Exemptions), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesseeis allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 607/JPR/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jan 2024

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (C.A.)&For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)

Section 12ASection 253(3)

income thereof if the trust or institution is created or established for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste;" 1.7. Section 13(1)(b) prohibits the benefit of section 11 to a charitable trust if it is created or established for the benefit of any particular religious community

Mandir Shree Bhairav Ji Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 427/JPR/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Nov 2023

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vikash Rajvanshi (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

activities. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that such trusts with composite objects would not be expelled out of the purview of Section 13(1)(b) per se i.e., a trust existing solely for religious purpose. The Hon’ble Court made reference to the decision of the Constitution Bench ... channel the benefits to any community if not the Dawoodi Bohra Community and thus, would not fall under the provisions of Section 13(1)(b) of the Act. In that view of the matter, the Court held that the respondent-trust is a charitable and religious trust which does

DCIT, Circle-1(1)-Exemption, New Delhi vs. Hamdard Laboratories (India), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1311/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri T James Singson, CIT, DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(2)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL

Dawat E Islami, Raipur vs. The CIT ( Exemption ) Bhopal, Bhopal

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

ITA 431/IND/2022[00]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidawat E Islami Chhttisgarh Cit(Exemption) Sanjay Nagar R D A Plot Raipur Bhopal Vs. Raipur, Chhttisgarh (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aadtd 7213 R Assessee By Shri Ankit Chowksi, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2023

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)

which makes the trust as composite trust i.e. charitable and religious trust and therefore, the assessee is found to involved in violation of section 13(1)(b) of the Act as it is created for benefit of a particular religious community. He has submitted that the assesse has duly explained ... making an application to claim exemption u/s 11 or 12 by the assesse. Thus, the Ld. AR has submitted that the provisions of section 13(1)(b) are not applicable in the case of the assesse which is purely religious trust. The CIT(E) itself has accepted the fact that

Shri Buhari Vibhag Dasha Shrimali Jain Gnyati Samaj, Valod, Tapi, Surat vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahemdabad, Ahemadabad

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

ITA 71/SRT/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Physical Court) Shri Buhari Vibhag Dasha The Commissioner Of Income Shrimali Jain Gnyati Samaj, Tax (Exemptions), Vs. Vaniya Bazar, Buhari, Tal.- Ahmedabad, Room No. 609, Valod, Dist.-Tapi, Floor-6, Aayakar Bhawan Surat-394630. (Vejalpur), Nr. Sachin Tower, Pan: Aaatu 8250 E 100 Foot Road, Anandnagar- Prahladnagar Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Appellant Respondednt

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)Section 13(1)(d)Section 21A(1)(ac)Section 254(1)

could 5 Shri Buhari Vibhag Dasha Shrimali Jain Gnyati Samaj Vs CIT(E) be said that trust was a charitable religious trust and section 13(1)(b) would not be applicable. In DIT (E) Vs Sheth Jivandas Godidas Shankheshwar Parshwanath Ji Jain (supra) also held that where assessee-trust apart ... found that "the activities of the trust though both charitable and religious are not exclusively meant for a particular religious community" and, therefore section 13 (1) (b) was not attracted. Adverting to the facts of case in hand, we find that facts of this case is not at variance

Shri Surti Modh Vanik Jagruti Mandal, Mumbai vs. Exem. Ward-2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1316/MUM/2023[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1315 & 1316/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Shri Surti Modh Vanik बिधम/ Ito(E), Ward-2(3) Jagruti Mandal

For Appellant: Shri Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)

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

does not satisfies the genuineness of the activities of the trust u/s 12AB(1)(a)(i)(A) of the IT Act. Also Section 13(1)(b) of the Act states as under: Section 13(1) Nothing contained in section 11 [or section 12] shall operate so as to exclude from

Shri Surti Modh Vanik Jagruti Mandal, Mumbai vs. Exem. Ward-2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1315/MUM/2023[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2023-2024

For Appellant: Shri Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)

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

Vaishya Samaj Dharmashala Pratishthan Alani Devachi, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

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

ITA 1530/MUM/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2022-23 Vaishya Samaj Dharmashala Cit(Exemptions) Pratishthan Alandi Devachi 601, 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill Vs. 403 Om Sai Darshan Chs Ltd. Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Plot No. 41 Sector 40 Seawood Dr Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Nerul Navi Mumbai- 400706 Cumballa Hill, Mumbai- 400026 Pan No. Aabtv5222E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kedar PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, DR

Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 13(1)(a)Section 13(1)(b)

community/caste and not for the people at large, secondly, he observed that the assessee violated section 11(1), section 13(1)(a) and section 13(1)(b) of the Act, thirdly, the Ld. CIT(E) has also observed that in the form no. 10AB, assessee has mentioned activity ... benefit a section of public as distinguished from a specified individual. 4. Further, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that provision of section 13(1)(b) of the Act applies to trust which are purely for charitable purpose and not applicable to the composite trust for religious and charitable

Sindhu Seva Samiti, Surat vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 265/SRT/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.214/Srt/2023 (Physical Hearing) Mar Baselius Orthodox Syrian Church, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Ranchhod Nagar, Opp. Magdalla Port Colony, Ahmedabad Dumas Road, Magdalla B.O., Magdalla, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatm3808N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.265/Srt/2023 (Physical Hearing) Sindhu Seva Samiti, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Tp No.3 Fp 53, Anand Mahal Road, Ahmedabad Near Sneh Sankul Wadi, Adajan Choryasi, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabts3067J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(a)Section 13(1)(b)

reason that charitable activities of the trust were confined to a particular caste “Surat Parish” and “Sindhis” respectively, and therefore the provision of section 13(1)(b) of the Act are applicable and hence Ld. CIT(E) rejected the Form 10AB for the registration under ITA Nos.214/SRT/2023 & 265/SRT/2023 Mar Baselius ... driven by extraneous considerations while rejecting application. (3) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) was apparently incorrectly driven by the provisions of section 13(1)(b). (4) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) ought to have taken a judicious and liberal view rather than a hyper technical view

Mar Baselius Orthodox Syrian Church, Surat vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 214/SRT/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2023AY 2022-23

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(a)Section 13(1)(b)

Shree Amreli Modh Vanik Community Property, Amreli vs. The CIT-(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee are found devoid of merits and the same is hereby rejected

ITA 141/RJT/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Granting Registration. The Assessee Has Not Replied To The Above Notice, After Two Reminders, The Assessee Submitted The Details Stating That The Trust Is Maintaining & Providing Property Prominently Known As “Modh Mahajan Vadi” To The Modh Mahajan & Other Communities People On Various Occasions Of Marriage, Social Gathering, Social Events, Lecturers Etc., Along With Other Charitable Activities For General Benefits Of Community & Public At Large & Regularly Complying All The Provisions Of The Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, Including Filing Audit Reports & Giving Charity Contribution To The Charity Commissioner Regularly.

Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)Section 2(15)

benefit of a particular community i.e. "Amreli Modh Vanik" which does not endure for the benefit of the public, and thus, provisions of Section 13(1)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are fully applicable in this case. In view of the above said the applicant does not satisfy ... trust cannot be termed as charitable within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and against the provisions of Section 13(1)(b) of the Act. The assessee has not produced any documentary evidences in support of its claim and the case was relied upon by the assessee

Pradeep Kumar, Jhujhunu vs. ITO Ward -2, Jhujhunu

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 370/JPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

taxed separately at Maximum Marginal Rate in terms of proviso to Section 164(2)—Total amount was treated as income by invoking Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 11(5)— 11 Shri Pradeep Kumar, Jhunjhunu. Amount said to have received as donation was added back to income of assessee

M/S Akme Harmony Apartments Owners Welfare Association, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(2)(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 993/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Smt. D.D. Shamala, D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 154Section 167BSection 234

1. Income for private religious purpose {Section 13(1)(a) of the Act} 2. Income for the benefit of particular religious community {Section 13(1)(b) of the Act} 3. Income for the benefit of persons specified in section 13(3) & 13(1) of the Act. 4. Funds not invested

Sri Channamallikarjuna Trust Committee, Koppal vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1829/BANG/2018[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Sri Channamallikarjuna Trust Cit (Exemption), Vs. Committee Gangavathi Bengaluru. Sri Mallikarjuna Mutta – Gangavathi, District Koppal – 583 227. Pan : Aajts 7938 J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Veerabasanna Gowda, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Srinivas T. Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 2(15)Section 80

ACIT(E), Circle-1(1), New Delhi vs. Divya Jyoti Jagrati Sansthan, New Delhi

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

ITA 4188/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Yagyasaini Kakkar, CIT DR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 115BSection 12ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 32Section 32(1)Section 80G

reported in (2014) 43 taxmann.com 243 held that if the assessee trust is formed with both religious and charitable objects in terms of section 13(1)(b), its claim for registration u/s 12AA cannot be denied and it can only denied in case when such objects are carried ... purpose but collectively indicate both charitable and religious purpose then it has to be treated cumulative and would be outside the purview of section 13(1)(b). 13. Here, in this case, it cannot be said that the assessee was purely carrying out either charitable activities and not religious

ACIT (E), Circle- 2(1), New Delhi vs. The Indian Society of Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints, New Delhi

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

ITA 2361/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 2360/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 2361/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Acit(E), Vs The Indian Society Of Church Of Circle-2(1), Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints, New Delhi C-37, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatt0672R

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)

activities of the ITA Nos. 2360 & 2361/Del/2018 2 Indian Society of Church assessee are primarily off religious nature and in clear violation of Section 13(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 4. The relevant part as extracted from the order of the ld. CIT (A) is as below ... objects and activities are geared for the benefit of Christian religion which was held to be in violation of the provision of section 13(1)(b). Accordingly, the assessee was asked to show cause as to why exemption should not be denied since the society had purely religious objects

ACIT (E), Circle- 2(1), New Delhi vs. The Indian Society of Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints, New Delhi

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

ITA 2360/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)

ACIT(E), Circle- 1(1), New Delhi vs. Indian Evangelical Team, New Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1691/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1690/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1691/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Acit(E), Vs Indian Evangelical Team, Circle-1(1), 126, Andheri More, Mehrauli, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110074 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati0283M Assessee By : Sh. George Kashi, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. George Kashi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, CIT DR

Section 1Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(b)

ground that the society was not a religious society and there ITA Nos. 1690 & 1691/Del/2018 2 Indian Evangelical Team was a violation of section 13(1)(b). The assessee was in appeal against the order of the Assessing Officer and it was submitted that the assessee is a religious society ... mischief of the provision of section 13(1)(b) was not attracted. The ld. CIT(A)- XVI, New Delhi in appeal No.28/1995-96 allowed the appeal of the assessee mainly on the ground that the assessee has been allowed exemption for all the preceding years and there was no material change

ACIT(E), Circle- 1(1), New Delhi vs. Indian Evangelical Team, New Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1690/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. George Kashi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, CIT DR

Section 1Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(b)

DCIT, Exemption Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Bharat Sushamachar Samiti, Dehradun

ITA 5317/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, M/S. Bharat Sushamachar Samiti, P. O. Kulhan, Vs. Exemption Circle, Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun. Ghaziabad. Pan: Aaabb0034D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri George Koshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sat Pal Gulati [CIT] – DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

object and purpose of the trust was confined only to a particular religious community, the same would attract the provision of section 13(1)(b). In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the objects of the trust were not indicative of a wholly religious purpose but were ... dual tenor of religious and charitable purposes and the charitable activities are not exclusively meant for a particular religious community, the provision of section 13(1)(b) are not applicable and the assessee trust is entitled to claim exemption u/s 11. 6.2 What flows from these judgments is that imparting