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.

3 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 56clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka460Delhi379Mumbai286Bangalore140Chennai105Jaipur78Hyderabad75Ahmedabad72Chandigarh43Cochin43Pune41Lucknow34Kolkata32Indore29Visakhapatnam20Amritsar18Calcutta18Surat17Nagpur15Agra12Allahabad10Telangana8Rajkot8Patna7Kerala5SC5Varanasi5Rajasthan3Dehradun3Raipur3Cuttack2Andhra Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Punjab & Haryana1Orissa1Ranchi1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 12A20Section 1275Section 143(3)3Exemption3Section 1322Section 12A(1)(ac)2Section 112Limitation/Time-bar2

DR. VIRENDRA SWAROOP EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION,KANPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 211/DDN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun16 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2023-24] Dr. Virendra Swaroop Vs Acit Educational Foundation Central Circle 15/96, Civil Lines, Kanpur Dehradun Uttar Pradesh-208001 Pan-Aaajd0224D Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv. Shri Rajiv Sahni, Ca Shri Sumit Lal Chandanim, Adv. Shri Shivam Yadav, Adv. & Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.09.2025 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Kanpur [“Pcit”] Passed U/S 12(Ab)(4)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[“The Act”] Cancelling The Registration Granted U/S 12A Of The Act From Assessment Year 2023-24 & Onwards.

Section 11Section 12Section 127Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 132Section 143(3)

charitable or religious purposes, has been applied, other than for the objects of the trust or institution;" 19. Thus, if it was the case of the PCIT (Central), Gurgaon that he was exercising the powers u/s 12AB(4)(a) on his own cognizance of the ‘specified violation’, then, at first instance as he was not competent authority u/s 12AB

LITTLE SCHOLAR PRATHMIK VIDHYALAYA SHIKSHA SANSTHAN,KASHIPUR vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 108/DDN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Mar 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing) Little Scholar Prathmik Vs. Cit(E), Vidhyalaya Shiksha Samiti, Lucknow Bhalla Farm,Ramnagar, Kashipur, Uttarakhand 244713 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaaal2930K Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/03/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

56 days. Considering the reason adduced in the condonation petition, we are inclined to condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issuance of notice. Hence we proceed to dispose of this appeal on hearing the Learned DR and based on materials available

M/S SUSHILA DEVI CENTRE FOR PROFESSIONAL STUDIES AND RESEARCH,DEHRADUN vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), KANPUR (JAO- DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 131/DDN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Oct 2025AY 2024-25
Section 127Section 127(2)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

charitable or religious purposes, has been applied, other than\nfor the objects of the trust or institution;\"\n19.\nThus, if it was the case of the PCIT (Central), Gurgaon that he was exercising\nthe powers u/s 12AB(4)(a) on his own cognizance of the ‘specified violation', then, at\nfirst instance as he was not competent authority u/s 12AB