BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

7 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 92clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka452Mumbai274Delhi234Chennai107Bangalore105Jaipur74Ahmedabad69Chandigarh53Pune45Cochin39Kolkata28Visakhapatnam27Hyderabad24Calcutta16Allahabad16Lucknow16Surat12Amritsar11Indore11Telangana8Cuttack7Agra7Nagpur3Patna3Rajasthan3Rajkot3SC2Jodhpur2Ranchi1Raipur1Andhra Pradesh1Dehradun1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 12A16Section 2(15)9Section 145(3)6Addition to Income5Exemption4Section 1543Section 362Section 112Charitable Trust2

JHASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. DY. C.I.T., CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 256/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 355/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 149/AGR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 216/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2021AY 2011-12
Section 124Section 142Section 153

trust attracted the proviso to section 2(15) and hence these were not for 'charitable purpose' and fur this reason provisions of section 13(8) of the I.T.Act are clearly attracted. (ii) That, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law in directing to exclude Rs.17,56,27.767/- from the amount of Rs.42,24,51,350/- by ignoring the provisions

LIONS CLUB GUNA CITY PARMARTHIK NIYAS,GUNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), GWALIOR

ITA 274/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 154(1)(b)Section 250

92,66,092/- as income of the appellant and raised demand of Rs.89,74,690/-, whereas according to the assessee, it had carried out charitable activities and had applied more than 85% of its receipts for charitable purposes. Appellant filed audit report and revised return but the demand has not been rectified. Rectification application moved

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4(1), AGRA vs. DR. ANIL KUMAR VERMA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the C

ITA 274/AGR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaa.Y. :2009-10

Section 36Section 40

Charitable Trust. The ld. AR had also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, 379 ITR 347 and Ors. 31. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. In our view this ground and the other grounds adjudicated by us hereinabove in the appeal

SHREE TEEKAM CHAND EDUCAQTIONAL &,AGRA vs. C.I.T.-I, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 359/AGR/2014[-]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Dec 2017

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenashree Teekam Chand Educational Vs..Cit -1 & Charitable Trust Society Agra. 22, Nehru Nagar, Agra. Panno.Aakts2145Q (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 12ASection 2(15)

section 2(15), or that the affiliation granted by Central Board of Secondary Education Board vide letter CBSE/Afll./SL-01205-13-14/2013- 14 was not genuine, or the school building in which school is being run was not in existence, or that the school was run by G.D. Goenka, a separate entity; that the appellant is an independent trust with no interference