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.

89 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 13(10)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,062Delhi1,027Chennai564Karnataka556Bangalore521Ahmedabad329Pune291Jaipur259Hyderabad187Kolkata179Chandigarh120Surat89Cochin89Indore86Rajkot86Lucknow69Amritsar63Visakhapatnam52Cuttack47Raipur42Allahabad37Nagpur32Agra32Telangana31Jodhpur28Calcutta25Patna19SC18Kerala10Dehradun9Guwahati9Varanasi8Rajasthan6Punjab & Haryana6Jabalpur5Panaji5Orissa3Andhra Pradesh2Ranchi2Himachal Pradesh2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 11113Section 12A102Section 2(15)59Addition to Income51Exemption48Section 143(3)31Section 139(1)30Section 13228Section 1326

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)

10 of 14 irrespective of caste, creed, sect, colour etc. and since there is no restriction of entry of any particular community and since it has been held that if the Honorarium paid to the Brahmins of the assessee trust is excluded, then there is no violation of the provisions of sub-section 5B of section 80G, therefore

NAUGHTYS PET SANCTUARY,KERALA vs. CIT( EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 89 · Page 1 of 5

Section 153A24
Charitable Trust24
Condonation of Delay14
ITA 543/COCH/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Apr 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)

10 13. Surprisingly the Appellant Trust received a communication from the Office of ITO Exemption ward TVM vide ITBA/COM/F/17/202324/1061843015(1) dated 1st March 2024 asking for bank statement and also some clarification regarding a particular clause in the trust deed. 3. Brief facts of the case are that Naughty's Pet Sanctuary, Thiruvananthapuram, is a public charitable trust registered

AYANA CHARITABLE TRUST,THIRUVALLA vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed

ITA 14/COCH/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, &For Respondent: Smt. Veni Raj, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 132

10 was filed timely specifying the purpose; 2. Funds were invested as per Section 11(5); 3. Accumulated amounts were utilized within five years strictly for declared purposes. Hence, the allegation is false and ought not be upheld. e) Allegation: Capital expenditure not aligned with objectives Capital expenditure on hospitals, schools, and churches directly furthers BEC's religious and charitable

M/S.BELIEVERS EASTERN CHURCH,THIRUVALLA vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed

ITA 15/COCH/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, &For Respondent: Smt. Veni Raj, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 132

10 was filed timely specifying the purpose; 2. Funds were invested as per Section 11(5); 3. Accumulated amounts were utilized within five years strictly for declared purposes. Hence, the allegation is false and ought not be upheld. e) Allegation: Capital expenditure not aligned with objectives Capital expenditure on hospitals, schools, and churches directly furthers BEC's religious and charitable

LOVE INDIA MINISTRIES,THIRUVALLA vs. THE DCIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed

ITA 13/COCH/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, &For Respondent: Smt. Veni Raj, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 132

10 was filed timely specifying the purpose; 2. Funds were invested as per Section 11(5); 3. Accumulated amounts were utilized within five years strictly for declared purposes. Hence, the allegation is false and ought not be upheld. e) Allegation: Capital expenditure not aligned with objectives Capital expenditure on hospitals, schools, and churches directly furthers BEC's religious and charitable

LAST HOUR MINISTRY,THIRUVALLA vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed

ITA 12/COCH/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, &For Respondent: Smt. Veni Raj, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 132

10 was filed timely specifying the purpose; 2. Funds were invested as per Section 11(5); 3. Accumulated amounts were utilized within five years strictly for declared purposes. Hence, the allegation is false and ought not be upheld. e) Allegation: Capital expenditure not aligned with objectives Capital expenditure on hospitals, schools, and churches directly furthers BEC's religious and charitable

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

Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments

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

Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments

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

Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments

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

Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments

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

Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments

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

Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments

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

Charitable Institute (363 ITR 230) (Kar.) 5.4 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is any violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, it is to be proved by the Revenue only and without proving it, exemption u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be denied. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments

DCIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. ST JOSEPHS PROVINCE, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 443/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 13Section 13(9)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 21A

10. From a reading of the order of the CIT(A) it would manifest that the CIT(A) had granted exemption u/s. 11 by holding that provisions of sub-section (9) of section 13 are not applicable to religious charitable trusts

DCIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. ST. JOSEPHS PROVINCE, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 442/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 13Section 13(9)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 21A

10. From a reading of the order of the CIT(A) it would manifest that the CIT(A) had granted exemption u/s. 11 by holding that provisions of sub-section (9) of section 13 are not applicable to religious charitable trusts

THE DIT ( EXEMPTION), KOCHI vs. M/S.INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 507/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

13,600.00 v) Life Membership Fee Rs.12,22,125.00 vi) Medicine Premium Collection Rs. 1,51,734.00 vii) SB Interest Rs. 4,489.00 viii) Directory Advertisement Rs. 10,000.00 ix) Income from mandap keeper (renting of halls and food) Rs. 78,55,580.00 Total Rs.1,01,97,432.00 2.1 Thus, the Assessing Officer observed that since the assessee was letting

THE ADIT ( EXEMPTION), KOCHI vs. M/S.INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 327/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

13,600.00 v) Life Membership Fee Rs.12,22,125.00 vi) Medicine Premium Collection Rs. 1,51,734.00 vii) SB Interest Rs. 4,489.00 viii) Directory Advertisement Rs. 10,000.00 ix) Income from mandap keeper (renting of halls and food) Rs. 78,55,580.00 Total Rs.1,01,97,432.00 2.1 Thus, the Assessing Officer observed that since the assessee was letting

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

charitable trust. This Trust was taken over by Believers Church, Thiruvalla vide agreement dated 23/02/2009 and by that agreement all the assets and liabilities of Carmel Educational Trust were transferred to Believers Church and the assesses ceased to be the trustees of Carmel Educational Trust. According to the CIT(A), the right of trusteeship is not legally enforceable right

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

charitable trust. This Trust was taken over by Believers Church, Thiruvalla vide agreement dated 23/02/2009 and by that agreement all the assets and liabilities of Carmel Educational Trust were transferred to Believers Church and the assesses ceased to be the trustees of Carmel Educational Trust. According to the CIT(A), the right of trusteeship is not legally enforceable right

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

charitable trust. This Trust was taken over by Believers Church, Thiruvalla vide agreement dated 23/02/2009 and by that agreement all the assets and liabilities of Carmel Educational Trust were transferred to Believers Church and the assesses ceased to be the trustees of Carmel Educational Trust. According to the CIT(A), the right of trusteeship is not legally enforceable right