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.

64 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 10(25)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi698Mumbai628Karnataka475Chennai396Bangalore317Jaipur181Ahmedabad177Pune147Kolkata133Hyderabad110Chandigarh96Cochin64Lucknow63Amritsar48Indore47Cuttack42Rajkot36Allahabad31Visakhapatnam31Surat25Nagpur23Agra20Telangana19Raipur17Calcutta16SC15Jodhpur12Patna9Kerala7Rajasthan5Dehradun5Varanasi5Punjab & Haryana4Panaji2Andhra Pradesh2Jabalpur2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Ranchi1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 1167Section 12A53Addition to Income40Section 26334Exemption34Section 143(3)26Section 2(15)23Section 11(2)22Charitable Trust18

KIZHAKKE KOVILAKOM TRUST,MALAPPURAM vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 474/COCH/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Dec 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Varma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G(5)(vi)

25. Therefore, the Revenue could not take such a pedantic and narrow approach that the character of the charitable trust was lost if one particular expenditure was made for repair and renovation of Lord Vishnu's temple and that too by way of contribution to another trust. Therefore, the order of the Commissioner was set aside and the petitioner-trust

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

Showing 1–20 of 64 · Page 1 of 4

Section 80G16
Section 139(1)14
Depreciation8
ITA 210/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 31/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 35/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 213/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 32/COCH/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 28/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 34/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 27/COCH/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 30/COCH/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 33/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 29/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

25,40,470/-was taken as consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship such amount to be considered in the hands of Gracy Babu comes to Rs. 95,92,490/- [(2.97x 10,40,400) + (6.25 x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while

M/S.BHARATHAKSHEMAM,THRISSUR vs. THE ITO, THRISSUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 590/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(bb)Section 2(15)

10(23C) of the Act if they carry on commercial activities. Whether such an entity is carrying on an activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business is a question of fact which will be decided based on the nature, scope, extent and frequency of the activity. 7 I.T.A. No. 590/Coch/2019 3.1 There are industry and trade associations

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 257/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

25 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 charitable purpose of advancement of education, and not to earn profit. In fact, no profit has been established to have been earned by the assessee. The CIT has failed to specify as to how profit earning is the predominant activity of the assessee instead of carrying out its said charitable purpose. On the other hand, the assessee

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 260/COCH/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

25 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 charitable purpose of advancement of education, and not to earn profit. In fact, no profit has been established to have been earned by the assessee. The CIT has failed to specify as to how profit earning is the predominant activity of the assessee instead of carrying out its said charitable purpose. On the other hand, the assessee

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 259/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

25 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 charitable purpose of advancement of education, and not to earn profit. In fact, no profit has been established to have been earned by the assessee. The CIT has failed to specify as to how profit earning is the predominant activity of the assessee instead of carrying out its said charitable purpose. On the other hand, the assessee

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 255/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

25 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 charitable purpose of advancement of education, and not to earn profit. In fact, no profit has been established to have been earned by the assessee. The CIT has failed to specify as to how profit earning is the predominant activity of the assessee instead of carrying out its said charitable purpose. On the other hand, the assessee

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 256/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

25 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 charitable purpose of advancement of education, and not to earn profit. In fact, no profit has been established to have been earned by the assessee. The CIT has failed to specify as to how profit earning is the predominant activity of the assessee instead of carrying out its said charitable purpose. On the other hand, the assessee

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 258/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

25 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 charitable purpose of advancement of education, and not to earn profit. In fact, no profit has been established to have been earned by the assessee. The CIT has failed to specify as to how profit earning is the predominant activity of the assessee instead of carrying out its said charitable purpose. On the other hand, the assessee

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 261/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

25 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 charitable purpose of advancement of education, and not to earn profit. In fact, no profit has been established to have been earned by the assessee. The CIT has failed to specify as to how profit earning is the predominant activity of the assessee instead of carrying out its said charitable purpose. On the other hand, the assessee