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.

146 results for “capital gains”+ Charitable Trustclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai388Delhi236Chennai205Karnataka167Bangalore146Jaipur83Ahmedabad82Kolkata81Pune58Hyderabad41Chandigarh41Cochin33Indore25Visakhapatnam19Cuttack18Calcutta17Lucknow16Agra15Nagpur14Surat10Amritsar8Telangana7SC6Kerala5Rajkot4Allahabad3Rajasthan3Dehradun2Varanasi2Patna2Andhra Pradesh2Jabalpur2Orissa1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 1198Section 12A93Exemption64Addition to Income54Section 143(3)45Section 11(1)(a)45Section 80G42Disallowance34Section 2(15)32

GOBINDRAM CHANDRAMANI VIVEK,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 1(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in the manner indicated in this order

ITA 656/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok A Kulkarni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54F

gains, otherwise it would lead to double deduction of the same expenses viz. interest on housing loan on acquisition of capital asset, which is not permissible. The assessee reliance on judgment and orders of Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable Foundation(supra) , in our humble considered view is not correct, as it was in context of computing firstly, application of income

Showing 1–20 of 146 · Page 1 of 8

...
Charitable Trust31
Deduction30
Depreciation29

M/S UNITED BREWERIES LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 481/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT –DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

Charitable Trust (for short the "trust"). The assessee, as per the MOU, had acquired a right to use the court yard for their business of hotel, being run in the palace, more efficiently and profitably. The question is whether the expenditure of Rs.10 lakh resulted in any addition to the fixed capital of the assessee. According to the Revenue

M/S. VIJAYANAGAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,BENGALURU vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BENGALURU

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2006/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Hariprasad Nayak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 115TSection 12ASection 13Section 133A

capital expenditure and provisions for expenses. While such items may generally not be allowable as deductions under the head "profits and gains of business or profession" in the context of regular business entities, the same do qualify as application of income under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act in the case of charitable or religious trusts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S L K TRUST , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1434/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year: 2008-09 The Dcit, Vs. M/S. L. K. Trust, Circle – 5(2)(1), #9, Seshadri Road, Bangalore – 560 009. Bangalore. Pan: Aaatl 0522 A Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Assessee By : Shri. V. Sridhar, Ca Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.03.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 30.03.2017 Of Cit(A)-5, Bangalore, Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Assessee Is A Charitable Trust. It Owned Residential Land Measuring About 11 Acres & 20 Guntas Situated In Nagashettyhally, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Property’). The Assessee Together With One M/S. Kanyakumari Builders Pvt. Ltd., As Confirming Party No.1 & M/S. Khoday India Ltd., As Confirming Party No.2, Sold The Property For A Sale Consideration Of Rs.140 Crores By A Sale Deed Dated 31.01.2007 To M/S. Pebble Bay Developers Pvt. Ltd. In The Return Filed By The Assessee For Assessment Year 2007-08, The Assessee Declared Long Term Capital Gain On Sale Of The Property Only To The Extent Of 34% & Claimed That In Respect Of 66% Of The Property Sold, Capital Gain Page 2 Of 14 Cannot Be Regarded As Having Accrued To The Assessee. In The Course Of Assessment Proceedings For Assessment Year 2007-08, The Assessee Submitted A Letter Dated 31.03.2008 In Which The Assessee Gave The Reasons As To Why Only 34% Of The Capital Gain Is Declared In The Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2007-08. The Same Reads As Follows: Page 3 Of 14 The Ao Passed An Order Of Assessment On 31.03.2016 For Assessment Year 2007-08 Accepting Long Term Capital Gain To The Extent Of 34% Declared By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri. V. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

charitable trust. It owned residential land measuring about 11 acres and 20 guntas situated in Nagashettyhally, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk (hereinafter referred to as ‘the property’). The assessee together with one M/s. Kanyakumari Builders Pvt. Ltd., as confirming party No.1 and M/s. Khoday India Ltd., as confirming party No.2, sold the property for a sale consideration of Rs.140 Crores

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA , BAGALKOTE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 66/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA , BAGALKOTE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 65/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. SRI V C CHARANTIMATH , BAGALKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 236/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA , BAGALKOTE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 64/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. SRI.V.C.CHARANTIMATH , BAGALKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 235/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA,BAGALKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), , BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 2776/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERSHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA,BAGALKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 2775/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SAGHA,BAGALKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 2777/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. SRI. BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA, BAGALKOTE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 234/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 35ASection 80G

gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business.]" 6.12 It is well-settled principle of law that a business held under a trust is also a property

M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION MEDICAL ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX RANGE-17 , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 946/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Roumuan Paite, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Charitable and Educational Trust (supra), we remand the issue back to the AO to examine the facts from the record produced by the assessee and decide the issue in accordance with law, after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes. Unutilized grants treated as income 20. The ground raised

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.PANCHAJANYA VIDYA PEETA WELFARE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1787/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

gains of business" under s. 28 in which the provision for carry forward of losses was relevant. That, in the case of a charitable trust, there was no provision for carry forward of ITA Nos. 1785 to 1790/Bang/2016 & CO Nos. 52 to 57/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 11 the excess of expenditure of earlier years to be adjusted against income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.PANCHAJANYA VIDYA PEETA WELFARE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1789/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

gains of business" under s. 28 in which the provision for carry forward of losses was relevant. That, in the case of a charitable trust, there was no provision for carry forward of ITA Nos. 1785 to 1790/Bang/2016 & CO Nos. 52 to 57/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 11 the excess of expenditure of earlier years to be adjusted against income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.PANCHAJANYA VIDYA PEETA WELFARE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1786/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

gains of business" under s. 28 in which the provision for carry forward of losses was relevant. That, in the case of a charitable trust, there was no provision for carry forward of ITA Nos. 1785 to 1790/Bang/2016 & CO Nos. 52 to 57/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 11 the excess of expenditure of earlier years to be adjusted against income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.PANCHAJANYA VIDYA PEETA WELFARE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1785/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

gains of business" under s. 28 in which the provision for carry forward of losses was relevant. That, in the case of a charitable trust, there was no provision for carry forward of ITA Nos. 1785 to 1790/Bang/2016 & CO Nos. 52 to 57/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 11 the excess of expenditure of earlier years to be adjusted against income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.PANCHAJANYA VIDYA PEETA WELFARE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1788/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

gains of business" under s. 28 in which the provision for carry forward of losses was relevant. That, in the case of a charitable trust, there was no provision for carry forward of ITA Nos. 1785 to 1790/Bang/2016 & CO Nos. 52 to 57/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 11 the excess of expenditure of earlier years to be adjusted against income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.PANCHAJANYA VIDYA PEETA WELFARE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1790/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

gains of business" under s. 28 in which the provision for carry forward of losses was relevant. That, in the case of a charitable trust, there was no provision for carry forward of ITA Nos. 1785 to 1790/Bang/2016 & CO Nos. 52 to 57/Bang/2017 Page 6 of 11 the excess of expenditure of earlier years to be adjusted against income