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.

9 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 271Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka21Hyderabad10Bangalore9Mumbai5Kolkata3Jaipur3Rajkot2Chennai2Jodhpur1Cochin1Nagpur1Patna1Raipur1Delhi1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)45Section 1127Section 12A18Section 143(1)9Section 143(3)9Business Income9Charitable Trust9Exemption9Penalty9

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 739/BANG/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that

Addition to Income9

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 740/BANG/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 741/BANG/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 742/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 743/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 744/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 745/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 746/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that

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

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 747/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

charitable activity but carrying on business. Accordingly benefit of section 11 & 12 was denied and the income of the assessee was assessed as business income. As the turnover of the assessee for this year is approximately Rs.7.5 crores, the ld. AO issued a notice for levy of penalty u/s. 271B of the Act. The ld. AO categorically held that