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.

131 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 115clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka446Delhi188Chennai131Mumbai117Hyderabad68Bangalore68Jaipur29Chandigarh19Pune18Ahmedabad17Allahabad17Calcutta16Indore13Visakhapatnam11Lucknow10Rajkot7Kolkata7Agra6Jodhpur5Telangana5Amritsar5Nagpur4SC4Panaji2Rajasthan2Patna2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Cuttack1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 148223Section 234E154Section 200A101Section 14770Section 15164Section 148A49Section 200(3)46Charitable Trust43TDS38Section 151A

SHRIRAM OWNERSHIP TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both

ITA 407/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 406 & 407/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. Shriram Ownership Trust, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.4, Shriram House, I Floor, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan Aagts 2243H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Shaji P. Jacob, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 144ASection 14ASection 160(1)Section 161(1)Section 2(31)Section 56Section 56(1)Section 56(2)

Showing 1–20 of 131 · Page 1 of 7

37
Exemption35
Reopening of Assessment33
Section 56(2)(vii)

charitable purpose. 22. What we find is that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had confirmed the addition u/s. 2(24)(xv) of the Act r.w.s. 56(2)(vii) of the Act. Both these Sections are reproduced hereunder:- Sec. 2(24) ‘’income includes--- (i)................ (ii).......................... (xv) any sum of money or value of property referred to in clause

SHRIRAM OWNERSHIP TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both

ITA 406/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 406 & 407/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. Shriram Ownership Trust, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.4, Shriram House, I Floor, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan Aagts 2243H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Shaji P. Jacob, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 144ASection 14ASection 160(1)Section 161(1)Section 2(31)Section 56Section 56(1)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

charitable purpose. 22. What we find is that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had confirmed the addition u/s. 2(24)(xv) of the Act r.w.s. 56(2)(vii) of the Act. Both these Sections are reproduced hereunder:- Sec. 2(24) ‘’income includes--- (i)................ (ii).......................... (xv) any sum of money or value of property referred to in clause

SAPPAHIRE EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,THANJAVUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD,, TRICHY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2416/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Sheila Parthasarthy
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 271A

Charitable Trust :: 3 :: reassessment or re-computation u/s.147 of the Act and (b) the issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act shall be through automated allocation, in accordance with risk management strategy formulated by the Board as referred to in Section 148 of the Act for issuance of notice and in a faceless manner, to the extent provided in Section

SUPPAHIRE EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,THANJAVUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD,, TRICHY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2417/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Sheila Parthasarthy
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 271A

Charitable Trust :: 3 :: reassessment or re-computation u/s.147 of the Act and (b) the issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act shall be through automated allocation, in accordance with risk management strategy formulated by the Board as referred to in Section 148 of the Act for issuance of notice and in a faceless manner, to the extent provided in Section

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2125/CHNY/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

115 1999-00 2,71,55,378 5,50,06,760 8,21,62,138 1998-99 1,99,85,049 3,54,08,920 5,53,93,969 ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 5 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 (vi) Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohini Jain (Miss) vs. State of Karnataka and others

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2220/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

115 1999-00 2,71,55,378 5,50,06,760 8,21,62,138 1998-99 1,99,85,049 3,54,08,920 5,53,93,969 ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 5 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 (vi) Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohini Jain (Miss) vs. State of Karnataka and others

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2219/CHNY/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

115 1999-00 2,71,55,378 5,50,06,760 8,21,62,138 1998-99 1,99,85,049 3,54,08,920 5,53,93,969 ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 5 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 (vi) Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohini Jain (Miss) vs. State of Karnataka and others

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2126/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

115 1999-00 2,71,55,378 5,50,06,760 8,21,62,138 1998-99 1,99,85,049 3,54,08,920 5,53,93,969 ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 5 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 (vi) Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohini Jain (Miss) vs. State of Karnataka and others

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S SINDHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ( MADRAS ), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all the assessment

ITA 979/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri. V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri. Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 2(24)(iia)

115 CCH 253 (SC) submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the concept of charity and Institutions existing solely for profit and held that if any institutions earned more than 20% profit, then, said Institutions cannot be considered as solely existing for charitable purpose. The Ld.CIT(A) without considering relevant facts deleted the additions made

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S SINDHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ( MADRAS ), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all the assessment

ITA 975/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri. V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri. Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 2(24)(iia)

115 CCH 253 (SC) submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the concept of charity and Institutions existing solely for profit and held that if any institutions earned more than 20% profit, then, said Institutions cannot be considered as solely existing for charitable purpose. The Ld.CIT(A) without considering relevant facts deleted the additions made

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S SINDHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ( MADRAS ), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all the assessment

ITA 981/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri. Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 2(24)(iia)

115 CCH 253 (SC) submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the concept of charity and Institutions existing solely for profit and held that if any institutions earned more than 20% profit, then, said Institutions cannot be considered as solely existing for charitable purpose. The Ld.CIT(A) without considering relevant facts deleted the additions made

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S SINDHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ( MADRAS ), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all the assessment

ITA 980/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri. Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 2(24)(iia)

115 CCH 253 (SC) submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the concept of charity and Institutions existing solely for profit and held that if any institutions earned more than 20% profit, then, said Institutions cannot be considered as solely existing for charitable purpose. The Ld.CIT(A) without considering relevant facts deleted the additions made

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S SINDHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ( MADRAS ), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all the assessment

ITA 976/CHNY/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri. V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri. Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 2(24)(iia)

115 CCH 253 (SC) submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the concept of charity and Institutions existing solely for profit and held that if any institutions earned more than 20% profit, then, said Institutions cannot be considered as solely existing for charitable purpose. The Ld.CIT(A) without considering relevant facts deleted the additions made

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S SINDHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ( MADRAS ), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all the assessment

ITA 978/CHNY/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri. V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri. Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 2(24)(iia)

115 CCH 253 (SC) submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the concept of charity and Institutions existing solely for profit and held that if any institutions earned more than 20% profit, then, said Institutions cannot be considered as solely existing for charitable purpose. The Ld.CIT(A) without considering relevant facts deleted the additions made

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S SINDHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ( MADRAS ), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all the assessment

ITA 977/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri. V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri. Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 2(24)(iia)

115 CCH 253 (SC) submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the concept of charity and Institutions existing solely for profit and held that if any institutions earned more than 20% profit, then, said Institutions cannot be considered as solely existing for charitable purpose. The Ld.CIT(A) without considering relevant facts deleted the additions made

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

ITA 982/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Respondent: Mr.Percy J. Pardewalla, Sr
Section 10Section 115Section 161(1)Section 164Section 40A(2)(b)

115(U) and ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 14 -: pass through entitlement is restricted to the extent of income earned from VCU activity and by no stretch of imagination it can be extended to non- VCU interest. Even if it is presumed that that assessee is covered by section 161(1) of the IT Act, the income

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

ITA 981/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Respondent: Mr.Percy J. Pardewalla, Sr
Section 10Section 115Section 161(1)Section 164Section 40A(2)(b)

115(U) and ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 14 -: pass through entitlement is restricted to the extent of income earned from VCU activity and by no stretch of imagination it can be extended to non- VCU interest. Even if it is presumed that that assessee is covered by section 161(1) of the IT Act, the income

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

ITA 1902/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Respondent: Mr.Percy J. Pardewalla, Sr
Section 10Section 115Section 161(1)Section 164Section 40A(2)(b)

115(U) and ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 14 -: pass through entitlement is restricted to the extent of income earned from VCU activity and by no stretch of imagination it can be extended to non- VCU interest. Even if it is presumed that that assessee is covered by section 161(1) of the IT Act, the income

ITO, CHENNAI vs. TVS SHRIRAM GRWOTH FUND, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

ITA 1345/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Respondent: Mr.Percy J. Pardewalla, Sr
Section 10Section 115Section 161(1)Section 164Section 40A(2)(b)

115(U) and ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 14 -: pass through entitlement is restricted to the extent of income earned from VCU activity and by no stretch of imagination it can be extended to non- VCU interest. Even if it is presumed that that assessee is covered by section 161(1) of the IT Act, the income

ITO, CHENNAI vs. TVS SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

ITA 1401/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Respondent: Mr.Percy J. Pardewalla, Sr
Section 10Section 115Section 161(1)Section 164Section 40A(2)(b)

115(U) and ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 14 -: pass through entitlement is restricted to the extent of income earned from VCU activity and by no stretch of imagination it can be extended to non- VCU interest. Even if it is presumed that that assessee is covered by section 161(1) of the IT Act, the income