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.

22 results for “charitable trust”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka269Chennai185Mumbai184Delhi164Bangalore113Ahmedabad78Hyderabad76Pune67Jaipur62Chandigarh47Cochin40Allahabad33Lucknow31Kolkata29Amritsar22Visakhapatnam15Indore13Rajkot10Cuttack9Jodhpur9Nagpur8Guwahati7Raipur7Surat6SC6Agra5Telangana4Varanasi4Patna4Kerala1Rajasthan1Dehradun1Punjab & Haryana1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 12A35Section 1029Section 1119Exemption16Section 4012Addition to Income12Section 143(3)10Penalty10Section 2509Section 271(1)(c)

INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXAMPTION), JALANDHAR vs. SH. GURU HARGOBIND SAHIB CHARITABLE TRUST, JAGARON

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 570/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 570/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Vs Shree Guru Hargobind Sahib Ward, Jalandhar Charitable Trust, Opp. – Ludhiana Hospital, Vill – Kothe Baggu, Dagraon, Distt. Ludhiana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacts9358K Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Charan Dass, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini:

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, DR
Section 12A

Charitable Trust interest itself is in dispute. In case the chargeability of interest is the issue under dispute, the amount of interest shall be the tax effect. In cases where returned loss is reduced or assessed as income, the tax effect would include notional tax on disputed additions. In case of penalty

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. SMT. KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL, HOSHIARPUR

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

8
Section 234E5
Deduction4

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 157/ASR/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 157/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Smt. Krishna Devi Educational Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Charitable Society, Langri, Jalandhar Chandigarh Road, Mahilpur, Distt. Hoshiarpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abifs7407A

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Parvinder Kaur, CIT DR
Section 12A

Charitable Trust (hereinafter referred to as ‘disputed issues). Further, ‘tax effect’ shall be tax including applicable surcharge and cess. However, the tax will not include any interest thereon, except where chargeability of interest itself is in dispute. In case the chargeability of interest is the issue under dispute, the amount of interest shall be the tax effect. In cases where

M/S JAIN KASUR PARIVAR TRUST,,LUDHIANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ( EXAMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee trust stands allowed

ITA 641/ASR/2017[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar23 Apr 2019AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.641 (Asr)/2017 Assessment Year:2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Jain (Ld. Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan (Ld. CIT- DR)
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 2(15)Section 271A

penalty of Rs.37,648/- is arbitrary, unjustified against equity and natural justice. 2. The appeal is within time. 3. The appellant craves right to add any ground of hearing at the time of hearing.” ITA No.641 (Asr)/2017 2 M/s. Jain Kasur Parivar Trust vs. CIT(E) 3. The Appellant has also raised the additional grounds of appeal. ”1. That

SATNAM SINGH MEMORIAL TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD-III(2), JALANDHAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 478/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 478/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Bhardwar (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 10Section 10(23)(iiiae)Section 12ASection 143(3)

charitable institution u/s. 12AA of the Act, filed its’ return of income for the relevant year on 14.10.2010, at nil income; it’s operating statement reflecting a loss of Rs. 29,530 (PB pg. 3). Examining the same in the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that while expenditure aggregating to Rs.18,29,435, i.e., on electricity, salary, bonus

B.R CHARITABLE TRUST,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)- WARD, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 21/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 139Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(e)Section 272BSection 4C

Charitable Trust, Sector -6, Vs. ITO, (Exemption), Gangyal Jammu-180003 Ward-Jammu. [PAN: AABTB4276G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None. (Written submission) Respondent by Sh. Surendra Nath, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 10.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement 18.10.2022 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), Jammu

SIKH EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL,HOSHIAR PUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION ), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 580/ASR/2018[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Dec 2019AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudhry & Sh. O. P. Meenai.T.A. No. 580/Asr/2018 Assessment Year:

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alok Kumar CIT-DR
Section 12A

trust filed an application for registration u/s 12A of the on 28.03.2018 before CIT(E) Chandigarh. The CIT(E) has referred the provisions of section 12AA and observed that there are two basic conditions for grant of 2 Sikh Educational Council v. CIT(E) registration u/s 12AA. The same include, apart from the examination of objects of the society, satisfaction

M/S SHYMA LAL THAPAR FOUNDATION,MOGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICERII, MOGA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 592/ASR/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 644/(Asr)/2013 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.A. No. 592/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Jaswinder Singh (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan (D.R.)
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(2)Section 147

penalty proceedings (for AY 2010-11). The appeals raising common issues, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed per a common, consolidated order. Quantum Proceedings: 2. The assessee, a public trust running educational institutions, stands denied exemption u/s. 11 on it’s income for the relevant years for want of registration u/s. 12AA, i.e., in view of section

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR vs. DR SHYAM LAL THAPAR NURSING HOME, MOGA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 586/ASR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 644/(Asr)/2013 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.A. No. 592/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Jaswinder Singh (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan (D.R.)
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(2)Section 147

penalty proceedings (for AY 2010-11). The appeals raising common issues, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed per a common, consolidated order. Quantum Proceedings: 2. The assessee, a public trust running educational institutions, stands denied exemption u/s. 11 on it’s income for the relevant years for want of registration u/s. 12AA, i.e., in view of section

M/S. SHYAM LAL THAPAR FOUNDATION,MOGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER_II,, MOGA

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 644/ASR/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 644/(Asr)/2013 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.A. No. 592/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Jaswinder Singh (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan (D.R.)
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(2)Section 147

penalty proceedings (for AY 2010-11). The appeals raising common issues, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed per a common, consolidated order. Quantum Proceedings: 2. The assessee, a public trust running educational institutions, stands denied exemption u/s. 11 on it’s income for the relevant years for want of registration u/s. 12AA, i.e., in view of section

TILLA BABA FARID RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE SOCIETY,FARIDKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS), AMRITSAR.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 621/ASR/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 621/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Kataria (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Gubgotra (D.R.)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 32(1)

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c). In appeal, it was claimed that in-as-much as registration u/s. 12AA has since been granted, i.e., on 13.04.2015, the benefit of section 11 could not be denied. Alternatively, it was claimed that the AO has by mistake adopted the figure of gross receipt for reckoning tax liability, i.e., without excluding the related

ASSIATANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PHAGWARA CIRCLE, PHAGWARA vs. SHRI HARMESH KUMAR, PHILLAUR

In the result, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 42/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Dr. Vedanshu Tripathi, CIT DR
Section 133A

penalty and prosecution in respect of income, which was not disclosed under s. 132(4). In the light of these facts and circumstances of the case, no addition could be made merely by relying on the statement recorded under s. 132(4) when there is no evidence or material to justify such addition…..” Sir, further the same view has been

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PHAGWARA CIRCLE, PHAGWARA vs. SHRI CHUNI LAL, PHILLAUR

In the result, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 40/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Dr. Vedanshu Tripathi, CIT DR
Section 133A

penalty and prosecution in respect of income, which was not disclosed under s. 132(4). In the light of these facts and circumstances of the case, no addition could be made merely by relying on the statement recorded under s. 132(4) when there is no evidence or material to justify such addition…..” Sir, further the same view has been

M/S EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD. ,PATHANKOT vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-6,, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

ITA 284/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarsem Lal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

Charitable Trust v. CIT (in WP(C) 12347 of 2005 dated 9/5/2006), where the same contention, i.e., of the non- passing of orders (in that case u/s. 12AA as well as s. 80G(5) of the Act) within the stipulated time period of six months as amounting to a deemed acceptance of the relevant application/s, was negatived

MESERS EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD,PATHANKOT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

ITA 561/ASR/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarsem Lal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

Charitable Trust v. CIT (in WP(C) 12347 of 2005 dated 9/5/2006), where the same contention, i.e., of the non- passing of orders (in that case u/s. 12AA as well as s. 80G(5) of the Act) within the stipulated time period of six months as amounting to a deemed acceptance of the relevant application/s, was negatived

SH. VISHWA MITTER SEKHRI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,BATALA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION), AMRITSAR.

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

ITA 75/ASR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jul 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 75/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2007-08

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271

Charitable Society, . (Exemption) Amritsar O/s Pehari Gate, Batala. [PAN: AAETS 6776M] (Appellant) (Respendent) Appellant by Sh. Ashwani Kalia, C. A. Respondent by Smt. Ratinder Kaur, D. R. Date of Hearing 06.07.2021 Date of 13.07.2021 Pronouncement ORDER Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.10.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

M/S. IQBAL MEMORIAL TRUST ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

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

ITA 68/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 12ASection 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)(a)Section 200A(1)(b)Section 234E

charitable society registration u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act where the ld. AO has levied late fee of Rs.12,595/- for filing of TDS return late in respect of financial year 2012-13 under consideration. The counsel explained that the AO has stated in his order passed u/s 154 that is not empowered to determine the similarity of facts

COMMUNITY POLICING SUVIDHA CENTRE ( WEST ), NOW KNOWN AS SUB DIVISION SAANJH (COMMUNITY POLICING) SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD , JALANDHAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 14/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 234BSection 250

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income of Rs. 57,080/-are being initiated separately.” 5.1 The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued that the entire assessment was made on basis of the order of Sukhmani Society for Citizens Services , Mansa, (2012) 27 taxman.com 199 (Amritsar

SUB DIVISION SAANJH COMMUNITY POL ICING SOCIETY,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) WARD, JALANDHAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 13/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 234BSection 250

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income of Rs. 57,080/-are being initiated separately.” 5.1 The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued that the entire assessment was made on basis of the order of Sukhmani Society for Citizens Services , Mansa, (2012) 27 taxman.com 199 (Amritsar

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 610/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

trust and claim that the assessee had multiple activities so it not able to exempt u/s 10 (23C) (iiiad) for educational purpose. Accordingly, the exemption was denied, and the net profit was taken as a taxable income of the assessee. The addition was made Rs. 60,500/- for violation of section 40(a)(ia). But the assessee has claimed that

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD (EXEMPTION), JALANDHAR

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

ITA 608/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

trust and claim that the assessee had multiple activities so it not able to exempt u/s 10 (23C) (iiiad) for educational purpose. Accordingly, the exemption was denied, and the net profit was taken as a taxable income of the assessee. The addition was made Rs. 60,500/- for violation of section 40(a)(ia). But the assessee has claimed that