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.

2 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 144C(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai22Bangalore9Chennai6Hyderabad6Jaipur5Kolkata3Delhi2Jodhpur1Pune1

Key Topics

Section 80G12Section 143(3)3Section 2633Section 143(1)(a)2Section 1352Deduction2

AMERICAN EXPRESS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2468/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ritu Sharma,CIT-DR
Section 135Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)Section 80G

144C(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act is erroneous. 3. Narrating facts of the case, the ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee had incurred expenditure to the tune of Rs. 5,20,00,000/-under Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). The assessee in its book disallowed the said expenditure. The aforesaid expenditure included some donations which were eligible for deduction

AMWAY INDIA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI / NFAC, DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5912/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Manish Agarwalamway India Enterprises Private Dcit, Limited, Circle-1(1), Ground Floor, Elegance Tower, Vs. Delhi/Nfac. Plot No.8, Non Hierarchical Commercial, Jasola, Delhi-110025. Pan-Aaaca5603Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 92C

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") dated 28.10.2024 and determining the total income of the appellant at Rs 275,65,46,220/- against the returned income of Rs. 77,89,22,110/-. 2. The Ld. TPO/DRP/AO has erred on facts and in law in making addition on account of "AMP Intensity" amounting to Rs.170