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.

34 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 245clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka424Delhi120Mumbai75Bangalore34Chennai33Amritsar33Cochin23Lucknow21Allahabad16Calcutta16Chandigarh14Kolkata10Hyderabad7Jaipur5Indore4Telangana4Cuttack4Agra3SC3Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana1Pune1Varanasi1Andhra Pradesh1Guwahati1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 1136Section 2(15)28Addition to Income22Section 221Exemption19Section 12A10Section 1329Section 143(2)8Section 132(4)7

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 744/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 11Section 2(15)Section 234ASection 8

Section 234 of the Act for the purpose of verification of the correctness of the charge of interest. ii. Without prejudice to the above, the ld. A.R. submitted that in the event any divergent views are taken by different appellate authorities, High Courts, the interpretation favourable to the assessee should be adopted as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

Deduction7
Section 36
Charitable Trust5

THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - (EXEMPTIONS ) CIRCLE - 1, MANGALURU vs. M/S A. SHAMA RAO FOUNDATION, MANGALURU

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1464/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm I.T.A. No.1464/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. A. Shama Rao Foundation, Income-Tax (Exemptions), Circle- 13-2-116, Hotel Srinivas Building, 1, Mangaluru G.H.S. Road, Mangaluru-575 001. [Pan:Aaata 1629 B] (Revenue-Appellant) (Assessee -Respondent) Revenue By Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr) Assessee By Shri V. Srinivasan, Adv. Date Of Hearing 09/11/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 03/12/2020 O R D E R

Section 11(1)(d)Section 12A

245 wherein the Tribunal has exclusively dealt with this issue in detail. Of course, this decision has not considered the amended provisions of section 56(2) of the Act which governs I.T.A. No.1464/Bang/2018 the taxing of certain gifts despite its capital nature. In the said order, the Tribunal considered various decisions viz., the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal

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 234 of the Act for the purpose of verification\nof the correctness of the charge of interest.\nii.\nWithout prejudice to the above, the ld. A.R. submitted that in\nthe event any divergent views are taken by different appellate\nauthorities, High Courts, the interpretation favourable to the\nassessee should be adopted as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1,, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2089/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

charitable purpose if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

M/S. UDUPI NIRMITHI KENDRA,UDUPI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 1962/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

charitable purpose if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2086/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

charitable purpose if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2088/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

charitable purpose if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2087/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

charitable purpose if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

M/S. DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE -1, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 948/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

charitable purpose if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

M/S. UDUPI NIRMITHI KEDRA,UDUPI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE - 1, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 947/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

charitable purpose if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE ACADEMY FOR MANAGEMENT EDUCATION, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for both Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are dismissed

ITA 1075/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2015AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)For Respondent: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

Charitable Trust (199 ITR 819) and Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs. Muttaiah Chettiar Family Trust (245 ITR 400).” 4. A. Disallowance of Faculty Teaching Charges payable to Ohio University (for both A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2009-10). 4.1 In the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had claimed application

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S PEOPLE'S EDUCATATION SOCIETY, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1074/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. A. K. Garodia & Shri. Lalit Kumari.T.A No.1074/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax (E), Circle -1, Bengaluru .. Appellant V. M/S. Peoples Education Society, 50 Feet Road, Hanumanthanagar, Bsk 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560 050 .. Respondent Pan : Aaatp3955H Assessee By : Shri. Prashanth, C, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Iii Heard On : 31.05.2017 Pronounced On : 09.06.2017 O R D E R Per Lalit Kumar:

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth, C, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar, CIT-III
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 14Section 2(45)Section 21(1)

charitable purposes / activities of the trust. It is also coming from the record that the assessee has applied the total amount of Rs.47,87,64,431/- for the trust purposes. The reasoning given by the AO is this that as the excess fund was already available with the assessee-trust which was lying in the form FDRs, that should have

M/S DAKSHINA KANNADA KOOTA BRAHMANARA MITRA MANDALI,BANGALORE vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1483/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Suresh MuthukrishnanFor Respondent: Smt. Swapa Das, Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 2

Section ITA Nos.1483 & 1484/Bang/2013 Page 8 of 15 13(1)(b) which prohibits tax exemption to the charitable trust or institution created for the benefit of any religious community or caste. 10.4 It is therefore held that the assessee trust has not been created or established with an object of or for the charitable purpose of the 'relief

VIDYANIKETAN EDUCATION AND CULTURAL TRUST,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed, while the stay petition by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1349/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P.George

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Shankar Prasad, K., Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

245 ITR 400 (Mad) wherein following the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of DIT Vs. Singhania Charitable Trust 199 ITR 819 (Cal), it was held that the purpose of accumulation has to be mentioned specifically otherwise the accumulation claimed can be disallowed. 15. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) the Assessee

CENTRE FOR E-GOVERNANCE ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE

ITA 936/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri S Parthasarthi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)

Charitable Trust reported in 199 ITR 819 and Hon’ble Madras High Court in M.C. Muthiah . Page 7 of 30 Chettiar Family Trust reported in 245 ITR 400 to emphasise that the purpose of accumulation must be specific and cannot be general or routine. Since, the assessee failed to specify a clear purpose and merely stated broad objects

M/S. SRI. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES(REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1561/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 132(4)

245 held that\nnoting on loose papers without corroboration cannot justify additions.\nThe Hon'ble Court have time and again taken view that the search\nassessments must be based on incriminating material relating to the\nyear.\n14.15 In view of the above detailed discussion and on a holistic\nconsideration, we find that the Excel sheet is only a private loose

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. THE MYSORE EDUCATION SOCIETY, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1346/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri A R V Sreenivasan, JCIT (D.R)For Respondent: None
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)

Section 11 to the extent of the excess accumulation of income in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust (1993) 199 ITR 819 (Cal). The ld. DR has further contended that even the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD), KOLAR

ITA 903/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 132(4)

245 held that\nnoting on loose papers without corroboration cannot justify additions.\nThe Hon'ble Court have time and again taken view that the search\nassessments must be based on incriminating material relating to the\nyear.\n14.15 In view of the above detailed discussion and on a holistic\nconsideration, we find that the Excel sheet is only a private loose

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, KOLAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1548/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)

245 held that\nnoting on loose papers without corroboration cannot justify additions.\nThe Hon'ble Court have time and again taken view that the search\nassessments must be based on incriminating material relating to the\nyear.\n14.15 In view of the above detailed discussion and on a holistic\nconsideration, we find that the Excel sheet is only a private loose

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU vs. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, KOLAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1547/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 132(4)

245 held that\nnoting on loose papers without corroboration cannot justify additions.\nThe Hon'ble Court have time and again taken view that the search\nassessments must be based on incriminating material relating to the\nyear.\n14.15 In view of the above detailed discussion and on a holistic\nconsideration, we find that the Excel sheet is only a private loose