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.

74 results for “section 68”+ Charitable Trustclear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka459Delhi435Mumbai303Bangalore141Chennai141Hyderabad82Jaipur77Chandigarh74Ahmedabad71Pune58Lucknow43Kolkata38Indore22Cochin20Visakhapatnam18Allahabad17Cuttack17Calcutta16Nagpur15Agra12Rajkot10Patna8Amritsar8Raipur7Surat7Telangana7Varanasi7Kerala5Rajasthan3SC3Panaji2Jabalpur1Jodhpur1Ranchi1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 26366Section 12A47Section 13(3)39Section 1138Exemption38Addition to Income37Section 143(3)26Section 2(15)22Section 115B19Section 69A

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S INDO GLOBAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION, KHARAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 26/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 26/Chd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit, M/S Indo Global बनाम Circle-1(Exemptions), Education Foundation, Chandigarh Vill. Abhipur, Vs. Sub Tehsil Majra, Tehsil Kharar, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaati2838L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)

68,00,000/- 2. Swami Vivekananda Educational & Rs. 60,00,000/- Charitable Trust 3. Chaman Educational & Charitable Trust Rs. 3,40,000/- 5. The undisputed facts are that the voluntary contribution have been given and accepted as corpus by the Donor as well as Donee trust and necessary confirmations, both from the Donor and Donees have been submitted

Showing 1–20 of 74 · Page 1 of 4

17
Charitable Trust16
Disallowance13

M/S CHANDIGARH LAWN TENNIS ASSOCIATION,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

ITA 1382/CHANDI/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2013-14 Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Vs. The Ito (Exemptions), Association, Ward, Chandigarh Sector 10, Chandigarh Pan No. Aaatc4943J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Y.K. Sud, Ca Respondent By : Smt. Chanderkanta, Addl. Cit (On 22.3.2018) & Sh.Yoginder Mittal, Sr. Dr (On 13.7.2018) Date Of Hearing : 22.03.2018 & 13.7.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2018

For Appellant: Sh. Y.K. Sud, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Chanderkanta, Addl. CIT (on 22.3.2018)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 2(15)

trust or institution or notification issued in respect of such trust or institution has been withdrawn or rescinded.” 54. Therefore, with the introduction of second proviso to section 2(15) there is a paradigm shift from the earlier position. Though, some of the decisions of the Delhi High Court as referred to above and that of the Pb. & Hry. High

HAR NIHAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CHANDIGARH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the appellant Trust is allowed

ITA 258/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrir.L Negiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.258/Chd/2020 (U/S 12Aa (1)(B)(I) Har Nihal Charitable Trust, बनाम The Cit (Exemptions), H.No.68, Sector 5, Chandigarh Chandigarh 16009 (U.T) "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aabth4603D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing Through Video Conferencing "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Smt. C. Chandrakanta, Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.04.2021 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2021 आदेश/Order Per R.L. Negi:

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 12A

68, Sector 5, Chandigarh Chandigarh 16009 (U.T) "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AABTH4603D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing through video Conferencing "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee by : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue by : Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 26.04.2021 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2021 आदेश/Order Per R.L. Negi, Judicial Member: The appellant

M/S ARYANS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,MOHALI vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 821/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 821/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 M/S Aryans Educational & Vs. The Dcit, Circle-1 Charitable Trust, बनाम (Exemptions), # 2129, Phase-10, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L

For Appellant: Sh. Tej Mohan, Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 115BSection 13(1)(c)Section 133(6)Section 68

Charitable Trust, Mohali 2 assessing officer applying the provisions of Section 115BBC and Section 68 which is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified

ARYANS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST REGD, MOHALI,MOHALI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 1136/CHANDI/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1136/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2025-26 Aryans Educational & The Cit (Exemptions), Charitable Trust, Regd.Mohali Vs Chandigarh, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate, # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(ii)Section 13(3)

Charitable Institution by way of Finance Act, 2021 and assessee has been granted registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) on 18.07.2023. The controversy started from the assessment of assessment year 2013-14 to 2015-16. The AO during the assessment proceedings of these assessment years noticed that there was an imprest deposit against the name of Shri Anshu Kataria, Chairman

CHANDIGARH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL)-GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

ITA 97/CHANDI/2021[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2021AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

Charitable Trust Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Centra), Lucknow [2018] 93 taxmann.com 483(All.) • Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Pune Vs. Sungard Solutions(I) (P.) Ltd. [2019] 105 taxmann.com 67 (Bom) 5.19 The Ld. Pr. CIT(Central),Gurugram was of the view that he shall exercise all the powers and perform all the functions as stipulated

SHRI GURU RAM DASS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL) GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

ITA 98/CHANDI/2021[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2021AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

Charitable Trust Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Centra), Lucknow [2018] 93 taxmann.com 483(All.) • Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Pune Vs. Sungard Solutions(I) (P.) Ltd. [2019] 105 taxmann.com 67 (Bom) 5.19 The Ld. Pr. CIT(Central),Gurugram was of the view that he shall exercise all the powers and perform all the functions as stipulated

CHANDIGARH EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL,GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

ITA 96/CHANDI/2021[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2021AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

Charitable Trust Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Centra), Lucknow [2018] 93 taxmann.com 483(All.) • Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Pune Vs. Sungard Solutions(I) (P.) Ltd. [2019] 105 taxmann.com 67 (Bom) 5.19 The Ld. Pr. CIT(Central),Gurugram was of the view that he shall exercise all the powers and perform all the functions as stipulated

DCIT, C-,1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB MEDICAL FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 10/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Cir.1(Exemption) M/S.Punjab Medical Foundation Chandigarh. Vs. Charitable Trust 63-64, Waryam Nagar Cool Road, Jalandhar Pan : Aaatp 5171 B (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Sudhir Sehal, Advocate Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ashok K. Khana, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18/11/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/12/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri Ashok K. Khana, Addl.CIT
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

section 2(15) of the IT Act clearly provide that provision of medical relief is covered with in the definition of charitable purpose. The appellant has also relied upon the circular issued by the CBDT on this issue. 12 4.15 Having considered the material available on record, I find that appellant trust is claiming the benefit of exemption of income

JT. CIT (OSD), (E), C-2, CHANDIGARH vs. CH. LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST, YAMUNANAGAR

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

ITA 717/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 717/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR

Trust. To disbelieve the documents of the Department by the Ld. DCIT is beyond our understanding. We are submitting alongwith a copy of sales deed as well for your kind consideration. Moreover, the aforesaid person has passed the three step test of section 68; hence no additions are warranted. It is noted that this creditor has advanced

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

section 13(1)(c) read with 13(2)(c) and 13(2)(g) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Therefore, benefit U/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is disallowed to the assessee. As per the details provided by the assessee, total income of the trust during the year was Rs.11,98,68,227/-. The entire receipt of income

DCIT, C-1 (EXPEMTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S IMPROVEMENT TRUST HOSHIARPUR, HOSHIARPUR

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1310/CHANDI/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Mar 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. J.S. BhasinFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)

charitable trust within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. There are various case laws in favour of department on the same facts & grounds e.g. PUDA vs. CIT and Jalandhar Development Authority vs. CIT have been followed by Tribunal of Amritsar Bench in Jammu Development Authority vs. CIT reported as (2012) 52 SOT ASR 153 and uphelp

DCIT, C-1 (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S IMPROVEMENT TRUST KARTARPUR, KARTARPUR

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1309/CHANDI/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Mar 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. J.S. BhasinFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)

charitable trust within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. There are various case laws in favour of department on the same facts & grounds e.g. PUDA vs. CIT and Jalandhar Development Authority vs. CIT have been followed by Tribunal of Amritsar Bench in Jammu Development Authority vs. CIT reported as (2012) 52 SOT ASR 153 and uphelp

CT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is Partly Allowed for\nStatistical Purposes as per the directions above

ITA 396/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Ashray Sarna, CA(Virtual Mode)For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 250

charitable purpose as defined in Section 2(15) of the\nIncome Tax Act.The assessee society is affiliated with Central Board of Secondary\nEducation (CBSE), Punjab Technical University (PTU), All India Council of Technical\nEducation (AICTE), Council of Architecture. All of these are Governmental Bodies\npromoting and imparting education, and assessee society is affiliated and\nassociated with them. All these facts

DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH vs. THE PATIALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST, PATIALA

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for the Assessment years 2013-14 and 2015-16 are dismissed and appeal pertaining to the Assessment year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 164/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Oct 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Ashok Goel, CAFor Respondent: Dr. G.S. Phani Kishore, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

68 of 74 ITA-62-2015 and ITA 147-2016 - 69 - defective ventilation or creating new or improving existing means of communication and facilities for traffic. 79. The trust must also prepare development schemes. This duty contained in Section 24 is not akin to that of a private developer or a colonizer as wrongly suggested by the Assessing Officer

JCIT (OSD), (EXEMPTIONS), C-1, CHANDIGARH vs. PATIALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST, PATIALA

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for the Assessment years 2013-14 and 2015-16 are dismissed and appeal pertaining to the Assessment year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 468/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Oct 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Ashok Goel, CAFor Respondent: Dr. G.S. Phani Kishore, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

68 of 74 ITA-62-2015 and ITA 147-2016 - 69 - defective ventilation or creating new or improving existing means of communication and facilities for traffic. 79. The trust must also prepare development schemes. This duty contained in Section 24 is not akin to that of a private developer or a colonizer as wrongly suggested by the Assessing Officer

DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S IMPROVEMENT TRUST, PATIALA

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for the Assessment years 2013-14 and 2015-16 are dismissed and appeal pertaining to the Assessment year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 847/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Oct 2020AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Ashok Goel, CAFor Respondent: Dr. G.S. Phani Kishore, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

68 of 74 ITA-62-2015 and ITA 147-2016 - 69 - defective ventilation or creating new or improving existing means of communication and facilities for traffic. 79. The trust must also prepare development schemes. This duty contained in Section 24 is not akin to that of a private developer or a colonizer as wrongly suggested by the Assessing Officer

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 on which rent of Rs.12,35,271/- was paid. Copy of lease deed is submitted as Page No.102 to 105 of the paper-book. 3.7. The appellant further contended that the department should not have objected to the payment of lease rent to Smt. Suman Bansal which is quite reasonable and consistent with the past history

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 on which rent of Rs.12,35,271/- was paid. Copy of lease deed is submitted as Page No.102 to 105 of the paper-book. 3.7. The appellant further contended that the department should not have objected to the payment of lease rent to Smt. Suman Bansal which is quite reasonable and consistent with the past history

M/S HERITAGE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

ITA 1069/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2020AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, JCIT (Sr. DR)
Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

trust On perusal of the balance sheet of the society it is also seen that the society has received unsecured loan of Rs. 40,22,68,419/- till 31.03.2015 from various persons, name of the persons is also mentioned in the balance sheets. This unsecured loan includes amount of Rs. 34,97,68,419/-rom Delhi Public School till