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.

83 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 234Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai118Bangalore83Delhi78Jaipur44Chennai33Ahmedabad31Hyderabad23Lucknow23Karnataka21Amritsar10Pune9Indore9Kolkata7Jodhpur6Nagpur5Cuttack4Ranchi3Chandigarh3Allahabad3Rajkot3Agra2Jabalpur2Patna1SC1Surat1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 11142Addition to Income55Exemption54Section 143(3)46Section 12A44Section 25043Section 2(15)42Section 153C40Section 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 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

Showing 1–20 of 83 · Page 1 of 5

37
Section 1028
Charitable Trust22

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 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

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 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

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

ITA 355/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 153(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 43B

234B was also disputed. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) had adjudicated the grounds issue wise. As far as the limitation ground raised by the assessee, the Ld.CIT(A) had relied on the letter furnished by the assessee on 17/07/2023 in which the assessee had prayed to decide the denial of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act based on the judgment

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

ITA 354/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 153(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 43B

234B was also disputed. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) had adjudicated the grounds issue wise. As far as the limitation ground raised by the assessee, the Ld.CIT(A) had relied on the letter furnished by the assessee on 17/07/2023 in which the assessee had prayed to decide the denial of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act based on the judgment

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 170/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE- 1, BANGALORE vs. M/S BANGALORE DEVELOPEMNT AUTHORITY , BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 is allowed as indicated above and Revenue’s cross appeal is consequently dismissed

ITA 1087/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Susan D. George, CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

charitable trust in accordance with law under the scheme of the Income-tax Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. iii. Without prejudice the learned Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) is not justified in law in holding a sum of Rs.1533.2 (Rupees in lakhs) being rental income as covered by the proviso ti section

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS RANGE , BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 is allowed as indicated above and Revenue’s cross appeal is consequently dismissed

ITA 1104/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Susan D. George, CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

charitable trust in accordance with law under the scheme of the Income-tax Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. iii. Without prejudice the learned Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) is not justified in law in holding a sum of Rs.1533.2 (Rupees in lakhs) being rental income as covered by the proviso ti section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD , BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 951/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012 – 13

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CA
Section 11Section 13(8)Section 2(15)Section 43B

234B and 234D. 11. In view of the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing. the appellant prays that the order passed by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) 14. Bangalore be quashed or in the alternative, the relief as prayed for be kindly allowed. [he appellant prays accordingly.” Brief facts

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

ITA 169/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

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

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

ITA 1283/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Respondent: Date of hearing
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

M/S. AMARA JYOTHI EDUCATION TRUST,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 698/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

charitable trust engaged in imparting education and has been duly recognized and granted registration under Section 12AA (a) of the Income - tax Act. The assessee Trust is registered under Section 12AA (a) of the Act dated 28.11.2007 vide No. DIT (E)/ BLR/ 12A/ A - 1103/ AABTA4395F/ E-1/ 1007-08. The assessee Trust is imparting education since its inception

M/S. AMARA JYOTHI EDUCATION TRUST,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 690/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

charitable trust engaged in imparting education and has been duly recognized and granted registration under Section 12AA (a) of the Income - tax Act. The assessee Trust is registered under Section 12AA (a) of the Act dated 28.11.2007 vide No. DIT (E)/ BLR/ 12A/ A - 1103/ AABTA4395F/ E-1/ 1007-08. The assessee Trust is imparting education since its inception