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.

87 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 234Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai122Bangalore87Delhi82Jaipur42Chennai33Ahmedabad30Lucknow23Karnataka21Amritsar10Hyderabad8Kolkata7Indore6Pune6Jodhpur6Nagpur5Cuttack3Chandigarh3Allahabad3Rajkot3Agra2Jabalpur2Patna1Ranchi1SC1Surat1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 11150Addition to Income58Exemption56Section 2(15)46Section 12A46Section 153C46Section 25042Section 143(3)42Section 234B39Disallowance

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

ITA 1761/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

Charitable Trust" and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded and framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the reasons

Showing 1–20 of 87 · Page 1 of 5

38
Section 1027
Charitable Trust24

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

ITA 1764/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

Charitable Trust" and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded and framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the reasons

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

ITA 1766/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

Charitable Trust" and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded and framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the reasons

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

ITA 1762/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

Charitable Trust" and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded and framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the reasons

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

ITA 1763/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

Charitable Trust" and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded and framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the reasons

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

ITA 1765/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

Charitable Trust" and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded and framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the reasons

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals\nare allowed except the limitation ground

ITA 355/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 13(8)Section 153(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 43B

trust for the\npurposes of section 11(1). In such circumstances, we do not think that this\naddition is to be sustained. Even otherwise, there is no loss to the revenue\nif the said service charges were included in the financial year in which the\nsale deed was executed by the assessee. We, therefore accepted the ground\nraised

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals\nare allowed except the limitation ground

ITA 354/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
For Appellant: \nShri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 13(8)Section 153(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 43B

trust for the\npurposes of section 11(1). In such circumstances, we do not think that this\naddition is to be sustained. Even otherwise, there is no loss to the revenue\nif the said service charges were included in the financial year in which the\nsale deed was executed by the assessee. We, therefore accepted the ground\nraised

AL-BADAR EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,KALABURAGI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARY

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are allowed and the\nappeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1410/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Apr 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Hanchal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 12ASection 133ASection 143(1)Section 164(2)

sections": [ "12A", "133A", "143(1)", "164(2)", "11", "12", "10(23C)(iv)", "12AA", "13(3)", "153A", "153D", "234A", "234B", "234C" ], "issues": "Whether income received as capitation fees by a charitable trust

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BALLARI, BALLARI vs. MS AL BADAR EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST, BALLARI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are allowed and the\nappeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1483/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Hanchal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 164(2)

234B", "234C" ], "issues": "Whether unaccounted receipts collected as capitation fees for management seats are eligible for exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act, and if the trust's activities were genuinely charitable

SANGHAMITRA RURAL FINANCIAL SERVICES,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 745/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2024AY 2018-19
Section 11Section 2(15)Section 234A

section 11 of the Act and the\nposition available after amendment to section 2(15) of the Act,\nbrought into effect from 1st April, 2009. Yet another important aspect\nto be noted in this context is that, after the amendment by\nincorporating proviso to section 2(15), the 4th limb as to the\nadvancement of \"any other object of general

M/S. NORTH WESTERN KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,HUBLI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), HUBLI

In the result, the assessee's appeals for Assessment Years 2006-07 &

ITA 275/BANG/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Smt. Pratibha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, CIT (D.R)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 263

charitable purposes was required to be excluded for purpose of taking amount to be accumulated. Having regard to the clear pronouncement of their Lordships of the Supreme Court, it is difficult to accept that outgoings which are in the nature of application of income are to be excluded. The income available to the assessee before it was applied is directed

M/S SHRIMAD RAJCHANDRA GYAN MANDIR TRUST ,HUBLI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1), HUBLI

In the result, assessee’s appeal for Assessment

ITA 39/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Shrimad Rajchandra Gyan Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Mandir Trust, Income-Tax, Beside Sbi, Zonal Office, Circle-3(1), Kusagal Road, Keswapur, Hubli. Hubballi – 580 023. Pan : Aacts 4573 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sowmya, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.05.2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. Sowmya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Addl. CIT
Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 234B

trust, registered under section 12AA of the Act vide order dated 14.03.2002, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2011-12 on 30.03.2012 declaring NIL income. The case was selected for scrutiny for this Assessment Year and the assessment was concluded under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) vide order dated

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BANGALORE

ITA 512/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu\Nand\Nshri Keshav Dubey\N\Nita Nos.512 & 513/Bang/2025\N Assessment Year : 2021-22 & 2015-16\N\Nkarnataka Housing Board\N4Th Floor Cauvery Bhavan\Nk.G. Road\Nbangalore 560 009\Nvs.\Ndcit (Exemptions)\Ncircle-1\Nbangalore\N\Npan No:Aaajk0398K\N\Nappellant Respondent\N\Nappellant By : Sri Padamchand Khincha, A.R.\Nrespondent By : Sri K.M. Mahesh, D.R.\N\Ndate Of Hearing : 17.09.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2025\N\Norder\N\Nper Keshav Dubey:\N\Nthese Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of The 1D. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 18.02.2025 Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1073418441(1) For The Assessment Year 2021-22 & Vide Order Dated 31.1.2025 With Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1072790068(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issues In Both The Appeals Are Similar, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.\N\N2. First, We Take Up Assessee'S Appeal In Ita No.512/Bang/2025 For The Assessment Year 2021-22 For Adjudication. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:\N\N1. General Ground\N\N1.

For Appellant: Sri Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri K.M. Mahesh, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 234ASection 250

234B.\n\n4. Prayer\n\n4. 1. In view of the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing, the Appellant prays that the order passed under section 250 of the Act by the learned CIT(A), NFAC to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant be quashed or in the alternative the above grounds of appeal

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRLCE-1 , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed with\nthe above directions

ITA 169/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Nandini Das, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

234B be deleted; and\nx) Interest levied under section 234D be deleted.\nThe Appellant prays accordingly.\"\n\n4. Brief facts of the case shows that, assessee Karnataka Housing\nBoard was established as per the Karnataka Housing Board\nAct, 1962 by the Government of Karnataka as a successor of\nMysore Housing Board which was constituted in the year 1956.\nFurther

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1, UNITY BUILDING ANNEX vs. MYMUL RAITHA KALYANA TRUST, SIDDARATHANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA\nNo

ITA 923/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jan 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Parithivel, JCIT(DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 250

trust. It has been spent by\nthe assessee out of tide up grants which is evident from\nthe Receipts and Payments account of both the\n assessment years. Accordingly, he submitted that the\nprovision of section 13(1)(c) r.w.s 13(2) and 13(3) cannot\nbe applied.\n21. On the other hand, the ld.DR submitted that the\nabove amount

M/S. ARHAM MITRA MANDAL,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS)-WARD-1, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1110/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19
Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 250

Charitable Trust registered under section 12A of the\nAct w.e.f. 28.02.2002. Assessee is helping the poor by providing food, conducting\nmedical / health camps, etc. For the Assessment Year 2018-19, the assessee Trust\nhad filed the return of income on 28.09.2018 by declaring ‘Nil' income, after\nclaiming exemption under section 11 of the Act for Rs.42,690,910/- (including\nRs.8

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed with\nthe above directions

ITA 1283/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2025AY 2011-12
Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

234B be deleted; and\nx) Interest levied under section 234D be deleted.\nThe Appellant prays accordingly.\"\n4. Brief facts of the case shows that, assessee Karnataka Housing\nBoard was established as per the Karnataka Housing Board\nAct, 1962 by the Government of Karnataka as a successor of\nMysore Housing Board which was constituted in the year 1956.\nFurther

PRARTHANA EDUCATION SOCIETY,BANGALORE vs. DY.DIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filled by the assessee is partly

ITA 730/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Oct 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 80G

234B & 234C. ITA No.730(B)/2015] Page 2 of 16 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a education Society, engaged in imparting education and registered u/s 12A and recognised u/s 80G of the Income –tax Act, 1961, filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2011-12 declaring total income

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRLCE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed with the above directions

ITA 171/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Nandini Das, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

234B be deleted; and x) Interest levied under section 234D be deleted. The Appellant prays accordingly.” 4. Brief facts of the case shows that, assessee Karnataka Housing Board was established as per the Karnataka Housing Board Act, 1962 by the Government of Karnataka as a successor of Mysore Housing Board which was constituted in the year 1956. Further