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.

15 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 271clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka444Delhi189Mumbai135Chennai128Bangalore59Ahmedabad49Jaipur40Pune31Hyderabad26Lucknow23Chandigarh23Allahabad19Calcutta16Amritsar15Cochin15Kolkata15Visakhapatnam14Indore8Nagpur6Surat5Jodhpur4SC4Rajasthan3Cuttack3Agra3Rajkot3Telangana2Raipur2Ranchi1Punjab & Haryana1Dehradun1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 1029Section 12A21Section 1117Exemption13Section 4012Section 143(3)10Section 2508Section 271(1)(c)8Addition to Income7

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

Penalty7
Section 12A(2)5
Deduction4

SANT MAHESH MUNI JI BOREWALE WELFARE SOCIETY,MOGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS) WARD, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 596/ASR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Trilochan Singh PS Khalsa, DR
Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12A

section 11(2) of Income Tax act, 1961 for submission of the notice in the prescribed manner to the assessing authority and in the absence of any express or by clearly implied delegation to the rule making authority of any power to impose time limit. Such time limit prescribed in the rule 17 for submission of Form

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

charitable (or religious) trust or institution, on account of the delayed grant of registration u/s. 12AA, which is thus deemed as applicable even for prior years. This, as apparent from a reading of s. 12A, follows the withdrawal of the power of condonation of the delay in applying for the said registration, erstwhile vested with the competent authority w.e.f

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

charitable (or religious) trust or institution, on account of the delayed grant of registration u/s. 12AA, which is thus deemed as applicable even for prior years. This, as apparent from a reading of s. 12A, follows the withdrawal of the power of condonation of the delay in applying for the said registration, erstwhile vested with the competent authority w.e.f

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

charitable (or religious) trust or institution, on account of the delayed grant of registration u/s. 12AA, which is thus deemed as applicable even for prior years. This, as apparent from a reading of s. 12A, follows the withdrawal of the power of condonation of the delay in applying for the said registration, erstwhile vested with the competent authority w.e.f

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)

section 234A, B, C and D. 10. That the ld. Dy. CIT has erred in initiating penalty proceedings by issue of penalty notice under sec. 271(l)(c).’ 2.2 Before the Tribunal, the assessee’s principal contention (through its counsel, Sh. Bhardwar), was that the ld. CIT(A) had failed to adjudicate Ground 4 of the assessee’s appeal before

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

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

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

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) . The order

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

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) . The order

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)

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 expenditure, being

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

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

ITA 173/ASR/2017[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

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 (EXEMPTION) WARD, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 609/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

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