← All Phrases

“Section 2(15)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(15)1,405 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 2(15) is 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises (298 ITR 141), cited in 706 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 2(15)

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
143 Taxmann.com 278 · 2022 · Supreme Court
390
citing judgments

If activities for the advancement of general public utility are carried on as a business, income from such activities is not exempt under Section 11, even if the profits are utilized for the main charitable object. The argument that profits from general public utility activities can be ploughed back to charity to maintain exemption is not a good law.

Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association
121 ITR 1 · 1980 · Supreme Court
328
citing judgments

A charitable institution, whose predominant object is general public utility, can engage in non-charitable activities yielding incidental profits, provided these profits are deployed to achieve the dominant charitable object. A subsidiary object, if ancillary to the primary charitable purpose, does not negate the institution's charitable character.

Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT
101 ITR 234 · 1975 · Supreme Court
323
citing judgments

This case defines 'education' under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act as systematic instruction, schooling, or training given to the young for preparation for the work of life. It clarifies that 'education' in this context has a narrow meaning, not extending to every acquisition of further knowledge.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
341 ITR 385 · 2012 · High Court
270
citing judgments

A provision for doubtful debts cannot be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes.

CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce
55 ITR 722 · 1965 · Supreme Court
167
citing judgments

An organization qualifies as having a charitable purpose if its primary object is the advancement of general public utility, even if its members receive incidental benefits. The existence of incidental non-charitable objects does not negate its charitable status.

Queen’s Educational Society v. CIT
372 ITR 699 · 2015 · Supreme Court
152
citing judgments

An educational institution that generates a surplus does not automatically lose its charitable status or cease to exist solely for educational purposes. This is true if the surplus is reinvested for its educational objectives, and the predominant object test determines if the institution's primary aim is education or profit.

India Trade Promotion Organization v. DGIT(Exemption)
371 ITR 333 · 2015 · High Court
128
citing judgments

An institution engaged in the advancement of general public utility retains its charitable character and eligibility for exemptions under Section 11 or approval under Section 10(23C)(iv) provided profit is not its predominant motive, even if it generates incidental surpluses or collects fees.

Judgments citing Section 2(15)

Nutan Shikshan Sadhana Trust, Vadodara vs. CIT (Exemption), Ahemdabad

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

ITA 665/AHD/2025[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jun 2025
For Appellant: Shri Kushal Rathod, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT. DR
Section 2(15)Section 246Section 80GSection 80G(5)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR

Gandhinagar Arogya Nilayam Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. CIT (Exemptions), Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2705/CHNY/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपील सं./Ita Nos.2705/Chny/2024 Assessment Year: - Gandhinagar Arogya Nilayam Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Charitable Trust, (Exemption), New No.56, Old No.62, Chennai. 4Th Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Chennai- 600 020. [Pan:Aaatg2771L] (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. V.Swaminathan, C.A प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025

For Appellant: Mr. V.Swaminathan, C.AFor Respondent: Mr.R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 11(4)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ’सी’ न्यायपीठ चेन्नई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार

Students Education Society Gadag, Gadag vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 143/BANG/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : Na Students Education Society Basavareddi Hospital Edurige Malakoppanamath Building G.K.C. Rani Rasthe Cit (Exemptions) Vs. Gadag Bengaluru Karnataka 582 101 Pan No : Aanas3730M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Sri Prathik P., A.RFor Respondent: Sri E. Shridhar, D.R
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

year ending 31.03.2022, 31.03.2023 & 31.03.2024, we observe that the assessee has applied huge amount towards the charitable purposes within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and the registration u/s 12A of the Act has already been granted after verifying the genuineness of the activities carried

Fms Welfare Trust, Hyderabad vs. CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 276/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. (Accountant Member), Shri Ravish Sood (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

relevant details filed by the appellant, we find that the main objects of the appellant Trust are charitable in nature as defined in section 2(15) of the Act, including relief of poor, medical relief and advancement of any other object of general public utility. Further, the appellant has also

Fms Welfare Trust, Hyderabad vs. CIT(Exemptions), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 275/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. (Accountant Member), Shri Ravish Sood (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

relevant details filed by the appellant, we find that the main objects of the appellant Trust are charitable in nature as defined in section 2(15) of the Act, including relief of poor, medical relief and advancement of any other object of general public utility. Further, the appellant has also

Rkm Social Welfare Foundation, Chennai vs. CIT Exemption, Chennai

ITA 3233/CHNY/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3233/Chny/2024 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2025-26 Rkm Social Welfare Foundation, The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), 52/101, Chamiers Road, Vs. R.A. Puram, 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road Chennai – 600 028. Nungambakkam, Chennai. [Pan: Aakcr-3307-A] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N.C. Ravi Krishnan, C.A. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri. N.C. Ravi Krishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 8

seen that the applicant is not engaged in any charitable activities and its activities does not fall under any limb as defined in section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961. For brevity the same is reproduced as under: The expression “charitable purpose” has been defined under Section 2 ... involve public benefit as to fall within the meaning of charitable object. Therefore, education to fall within the limb of "charitable purpose” under section 2(15) should be for advancement of public and not merely for few specific persons. 8. Since, the foundation is actually engaged itself as recruiting agency

St Joseph Engineering College Alumni Association, Mangalore vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 424/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2025-26

For Appellant: Sri Akash Deshpande & Sri Hemant Pai, A.RsFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 12ASection 2(15)

abuse was a public event aimed at spreading awareness, which qualifies as a charitable activity under the category of general public utility under Section 2(15). o The assessee has undertaken genuine charitable activities, including social work and awareness initiatives, thereby satisfying the conditions laid down under Section 12AB

Doddaballapur Planning Authority, Bangalore vs. ITO, Exemption, Ward-3, Bangalore

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 2115/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Dinesh Kumar Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

charitable status. Therefore, AUDA is entitled to exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the proviso to Section 2(15) does not apply to disqualify it from such exemption which is not in dispute in the present case. 9.9 In conclusion, we dismiss

Hapur Pilkhuwa Development Authority, Delhi vs. DCIT, Exemtion Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 4691/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice Presdident & Shri Manish Agarwala.Yr. : 2014-15 Hapur Pilkhuwa Vs. Dcit Exemption Circle, Development Ghaziabad Authority, Room No. 105, Cgo C/O Kapil Goel, Complex, Advocate 1St Floor, Kamla Nehru F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Nagar, Ghaziabad Delhi – 110 085 Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Aaalh0057L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv. Department By Shri Surender Pal Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 Order Per Mahavir Singh, Vp : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.08.2024 Passed By The Nfac, New Delhi In Relation To Assessment Year 2014-15 On The Following Grounds:- I) That Orders Of Ao & Ld. First Appellate Authority Respectively Passed U/S. 143(3) & Section 250 Are Both Invalid / Nullity & Both Deserve To Be Quashed / Set Aside For Total Want Of Application Of Mind & Being Passed In Most 1

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(34)Section 154Section 2(15)Section 250

section 250 are both invalid in so far as aspect of holding of assessee’s activities fall foul of section 2(15) of the Act (that is assessee’s activities are not charitable in nature u/s. 2(15) which is grossly perverse and patently illegal on face ... been held that “there is no good reason for holding that Statutory bodies could not be treated as charitable within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act, as its object is to provide shelter to the homeless people. 11. So there being no material/evidence on record supporting

Sri Guru Trust, Cuttack vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 91/CTK/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra(Th.Rough Virtual Hearing At Kolkata ) आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.91 & 100/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2025-2026) Sri Guru Trust Vs Ito, Exemption, Cuttack Industrial Estate, Jagatpur Cuttack Pan No. :Aahts 8645 N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Nanak Fogla, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri Nanak Fogla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 12Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY

Sri Guru Trust, Cuttack vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 100/CTK/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad Vide Form 10Ab Vide Acknowledgement Number 419790920110624 Dated 11.06.2024 Submitting Other Documents Such As (1) Darpan Details (Ii) 80G Provisional Registration Certificate (Iii) Trust Deed (Iv) 12A Certificate (V) Financial Statements For Fy 19-20, 20- 21 & 21-22 & Activity Report. The Ld. Cit(E) Rejected The 80G Application Made By The Assessee Providing A Bald Statement Bereft Of Any Specific Findings That 'No Substantial Activities Which Are Charitable In Nature Are Being Carried Out By The Assessee, Which Is In Violation Of The Provisions Of The Section 80G Of The It Act, 1961'. It Was Submitted By The Id. Counsel For The Assessee That Once The Assessee Is Registered Under Section 12A Of The Act, The Application Filed By The Assessee Vide Form 10Ab For Approval U/S.80G Of The Act Deserves To Be Allowed. 5. On The Other Hand, Id. Cit-Dr Supported The Order Of The Id.Cit(E) & Submitted That The Assessee Trust Was Unable To Substantiate Before The Id. Cit(E) That Its Activities Are Charitable In Nature. Thus, The Id.Cit- Dr Prayed That The Order Passed By The Id. Cit(E) Should Be Upheld. 3

Section 12Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

2 ITA No.91&100/CTK/2025 out any activities which are charitable in nature violating the provisions of Section 80G of the

Ashirwad Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Circle, Pune

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

ITA 190/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Raja B. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 2(15)

observing that the activities of the assessee trust are not charitable as per the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act. On appeal against such assessment order passed 2 ITA No.190/PUN/2024, A.Y. 2015-16 u/s 143(3) of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order dated ... declared by the assessee for the reason that the activities of the assessee trust are not as per the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act and hence exemption claimed by the assessee are disallowed. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee went into the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC

Mifthaahul Jannah Educational and Charitable Trust, Tirupur vs. CIT, Exemptions, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1082/CHNY/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1082/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: - Mifthaahul Jannah Educational & The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Charitable Trust, (Exemptions), No.1, M.K.M, Compound, 1St Street, Chennai. Noyyal Street, Tirupur, Tamil Nadu-641 604. [Pan: Aaetm7514P] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.J.Saravanan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Bipin C.N, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr.J.Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 12ASection 2(15)

impart religious education to the masses would qualify as a charitable purpose qualifying under the head of education under the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Act. The institutions established to spread religious awareness by means of education though established to promote and further religious thought could

ACIT Circle-1(1) (E)New Delhi, Delhi vs. Delhi Bureau of Text Books, Delhi

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

ITA 1115/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalacit, Delhi Bureau Of Text Books Circle-1(1), 25/2 Institutional Area, New Delhi. Vs. Pankha Road, D Block, Janak Puri, Delhi-110058 Pan-Aaatd4122G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Ms. Suman Malik, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/06/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: Both The Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-40/10313/2018-19 & Appeal No. Nfac/2016- 17/10028873 For Assessment Year 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively.

Section 11Section 12

ITAT erred in holding that the activities carried out by the Assessee fell under the 4th limb of Section 2 (15) of the Act, i.e., 'the advancement of any other object of general public utility' and that its activities were not solely for purpose of advancement of 'education'. Questions ... under: “6. We have carefully gone through the record. There is no denial of the fact, as education within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and consequently eligible the exemption u/s 11 of the Act. Vide paragraph Nos. 20 to 28 of the order

ACIT Circle-1(1) (E) New Delhi, Delhi vs. Delhi Bureau of Text Books, Delhi

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

ITA 1114/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalacit, Delhi Bureau Of Text Books Circle-1(1), 25/2 Institutional Area, New Delhi. Vs. Pankha Road, D Block, Janak Puri, Delhi-110058 Pan-Aaatd4122G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Ms. Suman Malik, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/06/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: Both The Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-40/10313/2018-19 & Appeal No. Nfac/2016- 17/10028873 For Assessment Year 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively.

Section 11Section 12

ITAT erred in holding that the activities carried out by the Assessee fell under the 4th limb of Section 2 (15) of the Act, i.e., 'the advancement of any other object of general public utility' and that its activities were not solely for purpose of advancement of 'education'. Questions ... under: “6. We have carefully gone through the record. There is no denial of the fact, as education within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and consequently eligible the exemption u/s 11 of the Act. Vide paragraph Nos. 20 to 28 of the order

Academy of Liberal Education Regd, Sullia vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 717/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand Kalakeri, D.R
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

approval u/s 80G of the Act cannot be denied specially when it is established for the charitable purposes within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and the registration u/s 12A of the Act has already been granted after verifying the genuineness of the activities carried

Academy of General Education, Udupi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 716/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand Kalakeri, D.R
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

approval u/s 80G of the Act cannot be denied specially when it is established for the charitable purposes within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and the registration u/s 12A of the Act has already been granted after verifying the genuineness of the activities carried

City Hospital Charitable Trust, Mangalore vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 713/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand Kalakeri, D.R
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

approval u/s 80G of the Act cannot be denied specially when it is established for the charitable purposes within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and the registration u/s 12A of the Act has already been granted after verifying the genuineness of the activities carried

Dr. T M A Pai Foundation, Udupi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 712/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand Kalakeri, D.R
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

approval u/s 80G of the Act cannot be denied specially when it is established for the charitable purposes within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and the registration u/s 12A of the Act has already been granted after verifying the genuineness of the activities carried

Institute of Clinical Research India Society, Dehradun vs. CIT(A), Dehradun

Appeal is allowed

ITA 45/DDN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Institute Of Clinical Research Vs. Commissioner Of Income India Society, Tax (Appeals), 1St Floor, Building No.1, Dehradun Treenetra Vihar, Near Kargt Chowk, Dehradun Pan :Aabai3710P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr

Section 11Section 12ASection 194Section 194JSection 2(15)Section 40

ground No.1 are that the assessee is a charitable institution engaged in carrying out religious and charitable activities within the ambit of section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act. These charitable activities have been recognised by the Department and a certificates under section 12A and 80G has also been