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.

5 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 43(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi505Karnataka473Mumbai406Bangalore210Chennai169Ahmedabad103Jaipur100Hyderabad87Kolkata70Chandigarh55Pune45Cuttack30Lucknow26Indore24Surat20Calcutta17Allahabad15Rajkot13Visakhapatnam13Nagpur13Agra11Guwahati8Telangana8Jodhpur8Cochin7SC6Kerala5Dehradun5Amritsar5Raipur3Rajasthan3Patna2Ranchi1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 12A7Section 80G4Addition to Income3Section 133A2Section 1922Double Taxation/DTAA2Survey u/s 133A2Undisclosed Income2Exemption

MESERS SHRI SWAMI SHANKARNATH PARVAT CHARITABLE AND WELFARE TRUST ,KAPURTHALA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the assessee appeal is allowed

ITA 602/ASR/2018[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 602/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: N.A.

Section 12A

43,576/- 20.10.2017 Form No. 46 3,07,650/- 28.04.2017 Form No. 17 2,81,264/- 27.04.2017 Form No. 12 2,69,796/- 18.04.2017 Total 18,00,504/- From the above table it is noticed that the serial no. of the Form "J" is not as per dates, vouchers numbers are decreasing with respect to later dates. Also the amount

SHIROMANI GURDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I,

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 530/ASR/2009[]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenav.S. Cit – I Shirmoni Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee Amritsar Teja Singh Mundri Hall Sri Amritsar Pan:Aants1981K (Appellant) (Respondent)

2
Section 10Section 12ASection 2Section 80Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

trust though both charitable and religious are not exclusively meant for a particular religious community" and, therefore Section 13 (1) (b) was not attracted. In the present case too, the factual finding of the ITAT is likewise. It has been found that the activities of the Assessee Society, though 35 both religious and charitable, were not exclusively meant

DERA SWAMI JAGAT GIRI TRUST ( REGD),PATHANKOT vs. COMMISSIONER ODF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assesse society is allowed in the terms indicated as above

ITA 118/ASR/2020[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri P. N . Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Gautam, CIT(D.R.)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 192

charitable in nature and have fulfilled all the conditions laid down under the law. 3 ITA No.118 /(Asr)/20 9. That it is prayed that the exemption u/s 12A may kindly be allowed in the interest of natural justice. 10. That any other ground of appeal which may be argued at the time of hearing of the appeal. 2. Briefly

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

1,35,000 was not correct—Therefore, CIT(A) was justified in reducing the addition to the extent of actual investment in the property……” ACIT Vs. Anoop Kumar (2005) 94 TTJ (Asr) 288, wherein it is held that “………Income disclosed under s. 132(4) was subsequently retracted by the assessees. It was also not disclosed in the returns of income

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

1,35,000 was not correct—Therefore, CIT(A) was justified in reducing the addition to the extent of actual investment in the property……” ACIT Vs. Anoop Kumar (2005) 94 TTJ (Asr) 288, wherein it is held that “………Income disclosed under s. 132(4) was subsequently retracted by the assessees. It was also not disclosed in the returns of income