Search: charitable trust | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

41 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 131clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka490 Delhi264 Mumbai210 Chennai93 Bangalore67 Pune62 Kolkata44 Hyderabad42 Ahmedabad41 Chandigarh34 Jaipur31 Cochin29 Lucknow27 Calcutta17 Visakhapatnam14 Indore9 Telangana6 Surat5 Jodhpur4 Nagpur4 Varanasi4 Rajasthan3 Raipur3 Rajkot3 Dehradun2 Amritsar2 SC2 Patna1 Panaji1 Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 1164 Section 2(15)57 Exemption35 Section 12A30 Section 35A28 Section 143(3)25 Deduction16 Section 14811 Addition to Income11

THE ACIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2344/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate

Section 11Section 129Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 244A

Showing 1–20 of 41 · Page 1 of 3

Section 143(2)10

Section 142(1)10

Charitable Trust10

trust…” 10.1. The assessee further relied upon the judgement passed in the matter of Gagan Education Society-vs-ACIT, reported in (2011) 131 ITD 442 wherein the assessee society donated certain sum to another charitable society out of current year’s income and claimed deduction. The Hon’ble ITAT observed that the restriction imposed by section

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 805/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate

Section 11Section 129Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 244A

trust…” 10.1. The assessee further relied upon the judgement passed in the matter of Gagan Education Society-vs-ACIT, reported in (2011) 131 ITD 442 wherein the assessee society donated certain sum to another charitable society out of current year’s income and claimed deduction. The Hon’ble ITAT observed that the restriction imposed by section

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 265/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate

Section 11Section 129Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 244A

trust…” 10.1. The assessee further relied upon the judgement passed in the matter of Gagan Education Society-vs-ACIT, reported in (2011) 131 ITD 442 wherein the assessee society donated certain sum to another charitable society out of current year’s income and claimed deduction. The Hon’ble ITAT observed that the restriction imposed by section

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 806/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate

Section 11Section 129Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 244A

trust…” 10.1. The assessee further relied upon the judgement passed in the matter of Gagan Education Society-vs-ACIT, reported in (2011) 131 ITD 442 wherein the assessee society donated certain sum to another charitable society out of current year’s income and claimed deduction. The Hon’ble ITAT observed that the restriction imposed by section

CHAMUNDA FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the CO No.83/Ahd/2015 filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1071/AHD/2013[-]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2019

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl.

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish, CIT-DR &

Section 12ASection 2(15)

131 Taxman 386. In the said judgment, the contention of the Department predicated on double benefit was turned down in the following manner: "3. As stated above, the first question which requires consideration by this Court is: whether depreciation was allowable on the assets, the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under section

ITO(EXEMPTIONS),, AHMEDABAD vs. CHAMUNDA FOUNDATION,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO No.83/Ahd/2015 filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 829/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl.

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish, CIT-DR &

Section 12ASection 2(15)

131 Taxman 386. In the said judgment, the contention of the Department predicated on double benefit was turned down in the following manner: "3. As stated above, the first question which requires consideration by this Court is: whether depreciation was allowable on the assets, the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under section

THE DY. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. UTTHAN SEWA TRUST,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 21/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Jignesh Kumar P. Parikh, A.R

Section 11(1)Section 142(1)

131 Taxman 386 (Bombay)]. In the said judgment, the contention of the Department predicated on double benefit was turned down in the following manner: 3. As stated above, the first question which requires consideration by this Court is: whether depreciation was allowable on the assets, the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under section

P.M. BHIMANI ORGOCHEM PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2588/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R

Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

Charitable Trust are as under :- F.Y. Amount of donation 2009-10 Rs.15,00,000/- 2010-11 Rs.10,00,000/- 2011-12 Rs.5,00,000/- 5. During the course of assessment proceedings, a statement under Section 131

P.M. BHIMANI ORGOCHEM PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2587/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R

Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

Charitable Trust are as under :- F.Y. Amount of donation 2009-10 Rs.15,00,000/- 2010-11 Rs.10,00,000/- 2011-12 Rs.5,00,000/- 5. During the course of assessment proceedings, a statement under Section 131

P.M. BHIMANI ORGOCHEM PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2586/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R

Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

Charitable Trust are as under :- F.Y. Amount of donation 2009-10 Rs.15,00,000/- 2010-11 Rs.10,00,000/- 2011-12 Rs.5,00,000/- 5. During the course of assessment proceedings, a statement under Section 131

DCIT(E), CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

ITA 21/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)

charitable purposes. In respect of such an income the undertaking cannot claim that the same should also not be included in the exempted total income Applying this test on the present set of facts of the case, it is evident that though the Assessing Officer has computed the profits on transfer of land or plots

DCIT (EXMP) CIRCLE-1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

ITA 22/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)

charitable purposes. In respect of such an income the undertaking cannot claim that the same should also not be included in the exempted total income Applying this test on the present set of facts of the case, it is evident that though the Assessing Officer has computed the profits on transfer of land or plots

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

ITA 23/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)

charitable purposes. In respect of such an income the undertaking cannot claim that the same should also not be included in the exempted total income Applying this test on the present set of facts of the case, it is evident that though the Assessing Officer has computed the profits on transfer of land or plots

DCIT (EXMP) CIRCLE 1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

ITA 20/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)

charitable purposes. In respect of such an income the undertaking cannot claim that the same should also not be included in the exempted total income Applying this test on the present set of facts of the case, it is evident that though the Assessing Officer has computed the profits on transfer of land or plots

SHREE AATH PARAGANA GURJAR PRAJAPATI SAMAJ TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2025/AHD/2024[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : - Shree Aath Paragana Gurjar Prajapati The Cit(Exemption) Samaj Trust Vs. Vejalpur Prajapati Bhavan Chatrala Ahmedabad. Sola Railway Over Bridge Naittar Chede, Sola Ghatlodia. Pan : Abfts 9086 E (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri Prakash D. Shah & Shri Saiyam Shah, Ar : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/08/2025

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

131 villages of Aath Paragana Gurjar Prajapati Samaj, such reference only denotes an identifiable section of the public and does not imply that the trust is created for the benefit of a “particular religious community or caste” as envisaged under section 13(1)(b) of the Act. It was further contended that the trust’s activities are not exclusionary

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1656/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 10(23)(iiiad)Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

trust... " 10.1. The assessee further relied upon the judgement passed in the matter of Gagan Education Society-vs-ACIT, reported in (2011) 131 ITD 442 wherein the assessee society donated certain sum to another charitable society out of current year's income and claimed deduction. The Hon'ble ITAT observed that the restriction imposed by section

THE DY..DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1270/AHD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above head. ITA Nos.1253, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2013 AYs: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad Page 9 of 39 iv) The Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the set off of unabsorbed depreciation as the capital expenditure

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1256/AHD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above head. ITA Nos.1253, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2013 AYs: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad Page 9 of 39 iv) The Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the set off of unabsorbed depreciation as the capital expenditure

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1254/AHD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above head. ITA Nos.1253, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2013 AYs: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad Page 9 of 39 iv) The Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the set off of unabsorbed depreciation as the capital expenditure

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1253/AHD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above head. ITA Nos.1253, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2013 AYs: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad Page 9 of 39 iv) The Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the set off of unabsorbed depreciation as the capital expenditure