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.

40 results for “charitable trust”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka269Chennai187Mumbai186Delhi177Bangalore115Hyderabad80Ahmedabad77Pune64Jaipur55Chandigarh40Allahabad33Cochin32Kolkata29Lucknow24Indore16Visakhapatnam15Amritsar11Nagpur10Rajkot10Jodhpur9Cuttack8Raipur7Guwahati7Surat6SC6Agra4Patna4Telangana4Varanasi4Dehradun1Kerala1Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 26342Addition to Income20Section 143(3)17Section 14715Section 69A14Section 115B14Exemption12Penalty12Section 118Section 144

M/S SHAHEED KARTAR SINGH SARABHA CHARITABLE TRUST (REGD.),LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH

Appeal is allowed

ITA 174/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri AdityaFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Maan (Addl.CIT)
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 80G

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the ITA 174/Chd/2019_M/s Shaheed Kartar Singh 8 Sarabha Charitable Trust Vs DCIT(E) Income

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2

8
Charitable Trust8
Section 250(6)7

D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BANSAL CHARITABLE TRUST, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 340/CHANDI/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 2(15)Section 250(6)

Charitable Trust vs. Union of India and Others reported in 230 CTR 477 (Punj & Haryana) wherein it has been clearly held that merely because there is some surplus with the assessee it should not be the ground for denying the exemption. The decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has been followed by the Delhi High Court

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BANSAL CHARITABLE TRUST, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 339/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 2(15)Section 250(6)

Charitable Trust vs. Union of India and Others reported in 230 CTR 477 (Punj & Haryana) wherein it has been clearly held that merely because there is some surplus with the assessee it should not be the ground for denying the exemption. The decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has been followed by the Delhi High Court

J. K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 685/CHANDI/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

Charitable Institutions as well as the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of DIT(E) Vs. Sheth Mafatlal Gagal Bhai Foundation Trust does not support the case of the assessee as the facts are distinguishable. 7.4 It was accordingly submitted that in light of aforesaid submissions the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in sustaining the action

J.K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU & KASHMIR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE-1,, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 428/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

Charitable Institutions as well as the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of DIT(E) Vs. Sheth Mafatlal Gagal Bhai Foundation Trust does not support the case of the assessee as the facts are distinguishable. 7.4 It was accordingly submitted that in light of aforesaid submissions the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in sustaining the action

J.K.EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 126/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

Charitable Institutions as well as the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of DIT(E) Vs. Sheth Mafatlal Gagal Bhai Foundation Trust does not support the case of the assessee as the facts are distinguishable. 7.4 It was accordingly submitted that in light of aforesaid submissions the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in sustaining the action

M/S SHAHEED KARTAR SINGH SARABHA CHARITABLE TRUST (REGD.),LUDHIANA vs. CIT(A)-4, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1254/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Dec 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A Shri Aditya Kumar, C.A Shri Bhawesh Jindal, C.A Miss UdiFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT
Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

Charitable Trust and considering the fact that an appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh was already filed on 13.02.2019 (bearing No. 174/Chandi/2019) with respect to the quantum with respect to the said notice and was under the bonafide belief that no appeal is required to be filed against this order as an appeal

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 764/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 270ASection 5

Charitable Trust, Vs Circle – 2, Chandigarh. 111, Santpura Road, Model Town, S.O. Yamuna Nagar. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAATC9657M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 20.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 VIRTUAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 763/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 270ASection 5

Charitable Trust, Vs Circle – 2, Chandigarh. 111, Santpura Road, Model Town, S.O. Yamuna Nagar. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAATC9657M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 20.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 VIRTUAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 730/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 270ASection 5

Charitable Trust, Vs Circle – 2, Chandigarh. 111, Santpura Road, Model Town, S.O. Yamuna Nagar. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAATC9657M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 20.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 VIRTUAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV

GOLDEN WINES, 2673 PHASE-1, BASANT AVENUE, DUGRI,LUDHIANA vs. NARESH KUMAR MEENA, ITO WARD-6(3) LUDHIANA, CURRENT JURISDICTIONAL A.O. ITO WARD-6(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 736/CHANDI/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69B

charitable trusts." 5.6 Further, our reference was drawn to the written submission filed before the Ld. CIT(A) which are contained at pages 43 to 45 of the assessee’s paper book and the contents thereof read as under: Subject: Reply to the clarification notice issued dated 11.03.2024 With regards to the above captioned notice, it is submitted that

GOLDEN WINES, 2673 PHASE-1, BASANT AVENUE, DUGRI,LUDHIANA vs. NARESH KUMAR MEENA,ITO WARD 6(3), LUDHIANA,CURRENT JURISDICTIONAL A.O. ITO WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 734/CHANDI/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69B

charitable trusts." 5.6 Further, our reference was drawn to the written submission filed before the Ld. CIT(A) which are contained at pages 43 to 45 of the assessee’s paper book and the contents thereof read as under: Subject: Reply to the clarification notice issued dated 11.03.2024 With regards to the above captioned notice, it is submitted that

GOLDEN WINES, 2673 PHASE-1, BASANT AVENUE, DUGRI,LUDHIANA vs. NARESH KUMAR MEENA, ITO WARD6(3), LUDHIANA, CURRENT JURISDICTIONAL A,O, ITO WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 735/CHANDI/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69B

charitable trusts." 5.6 Further, our reference was drawn to the written submission filed before the Ld. CIT(A) which are contained at pages 43 to 45 of the assessee’s paper book and the contents thereof read as under: Subject: Reply to the clarification notice issued dated 11.03.2024 With regards to the above captioned notice, it is submitted that

GOLDEN WINES, 2673 PHASE-1, BASANT AVENUE, DUGRI,LUDHIANA vs. NARESH KUMAR MEENA, ITO WARD-6(3) LUDHIANA, CURRENT JURISDICTIONAL A.O. ITO WARD-6(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 733/CHANDI/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69B

charitable trusts." 5.6 Further, our reference was drawn to the written submission filed before the Ld. CIT(A) which are contained at pages 43 to 45 of the assessee’s paper book and the contents thereof read as under: Subject: Reply to the clarification notice issued dated 11.03.2024 With regards to the above captioned notice, it is submitted that

SH. PARSHOTAM LAL,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, we upheld the addition totaling to Rs 18,31,800/- towards cash seized u/s 69A in A

ITA 109/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishabh Marwah, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 69A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act on account of unexplained cash are being initiated separately.” 11. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who has since sustained the said addition made by the AO. Against the said findings and the direction of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

SH. PARSHOTAM LAL,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, we upheld the addition totaling to Rs 18,31,800/- towards cash seized u/s 69A in A

ITA 110/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishabh Marwah, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 69A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act on account of unexplained cash are being initiated separately.” 11. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who has since sustained the said addition made by the AO. Against the said findings and the direction of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

SH. PARSHOTAM LAL,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, we upheld the addition totaling to Rs 18,31,800/- towards cash seized u/s 69A in A

ITA 111/CHANDI/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishabh Marwah, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 69A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act on account of unexplained cash are being initiated separately.” 11. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who has since sustained the said addition made by the AO. Against the said findings and the direction of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

SH. PARSHOTAM LAL,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, we upheld the addition totaling to Rs 18,31,800/- towards cash seized u/s 69A in A

ITA 105/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishabh Marwah, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 69A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act on account of unexplained cash are being initiated separately.” 11. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who has since sustained the said addition made by the AO. Against the said findings and the direction of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

SH. PARSHOTAM LAL,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, we upheld the addition totaling to Rs 18,31,800/- towards cash seized u/s 69A in A

ITA 106/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishabh Marwah, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 69A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act on account of unexplained cash are being initiated separately.” 11. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who has since sustained the said addition made by the AO. Against the said findings and the direction of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

SH. PARSHOTAM LAL,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, we upheld the addition totaling to Rs 18,31,800/- towards cash seized u/s 69A in A

ITA 107/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishabh Marwah, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 69A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act on account of unexplained cash are being initiated separately.” 11. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who has since sustained the said addition made by the AO. Against the said findings and the direction of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before