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.

205 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 151clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka431Delhi205Mumbai106Chennai80Bangalore40Chandigarh31Pune31Jaipur26Ahmedabad25Hyderabad23Allahabad16Calcutta16Lucknow16Agra10Rajkot5Indore4Telangana4Rajasthan3Amritsar2Nagpur2Varanasi2Kolkata2Cuttack2Visakhapatnam1Andhra Pradesh1Dehradun1Jabalpur1SC1

Key Topics

Section 1163Section 14745Addition to Income43Section 12A42Section 14839Exemption34Section 20128Section 2(15)21Deduction21Section 143(3)

SUNSHINE EDUCATIONAL & DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, EXEMPTION, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4727/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT DR
Section 10(23)(c)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 194Section 2(15)Section 251(2)Section 40

Section 11; (ii) Income derived by the assessee from its activity of running school cannot said to be income derived from property held under the Trust; (iii) Charging of fees amounts to under charitable activities because educational institutions are not permitted to extract or recover the cost of charity from its beneficiaries by way of fees. 7. In support

Showing 1–20 of 205 · Page 1 of 11

...
17
Section 80G15
Disallowance15

CONFRERE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4464/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 12ASection 250Section 251Section 56

Section 11; (ii) Income derived by the assessee from its activity of running school cannot said to be income derived from property held under the Trust; (iii) Charging of fees amounts to under charitable activities because educational institutions are not permitted to extract or recover the cost of charity from its beneficiaries by way of fees. ITA Nos.4464 & 4463/Del/2017 Confrere

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 165/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

151 (All), wherein Their Lordships had observed as under:- 6. Shri Awasthi, learned counsel, submitted that as the assessee claimed exemption, being an educational institution as such it was required to obtain exemption from the prescribed authority under Section 10(23C) of the Act, which is mandatory. Since no exemption from the prescribed authority under Section

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 166/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

151 (All), wherein Their Lordships had observed as under:- 6. Shri Awasthi, learned counsel, submitted that as the assessee claimed exemption, being an educational institution as such it was required to obtain exemption from the prescribed authority under Section 10(23C) of the Act, which is mandatory. Since no exemption from the prescribed authority under Section

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, EXEMPTION RANGE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 6051/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

151 (All), wherein Their Lordships had observed as under:- 6. Shri Awasthi, learned counsel, submitted that as the assessee claimed exemption, being an educational institution as such it was required to obtain exemption from the prescribed authority under Section 10(23C) of the Act, which is mandatory. Since no exemption from the prescribed authority under Section

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 168/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

151 (All), wherein Their Lordships had observed as under:- 6. Shri Awasthi, learned counsel, submitted that as the assessee claimed exemption, being an educational institution as such it was required to obtain exemption from the prescribed authority under Section 10(23C) of the Act, which is mandatory. Since no exemption from the prescribed authority under Section

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 167/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

151 (All), wherein Their Lordships had observed as under:- 6. Shri Awasthi, learned counsel, submitted that as the assessee claimed exemption, being an educational institution as such it was required to obtain exemption from the prescribed authority under Section 10(23C) of the Act, which is mandatory. Since no exemption from the prescribed authority under Section

AKASH EDUCATION SOCIETY,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ITO(E), WARD GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result 1 – 3 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6392/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri H. Hasnain, ARFor Respondent: Shri NK Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)Section 56(1)

charitable (Society) Trust within the meaning of section 2(15) of IT. Act which is imparting education through its school and providing the students transport and Hostel facility, which is integral part of education because the whole function is run . the trust itself. 9. Because the Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in taxing

AKASH EDUCATION SOCIETY,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-3, NOIDA

In the result 1 – 3 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6391/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri H. Hasnain, ARFor Respondent: Shri NK Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)Section 56(1)

charitable (Society) Trust within the meaning of section 2(15) of IT. Act which is imparting education through its school and providing the students transport and Hostel facility, which is integral part of education because the whole function is run . the trust itself. 9. Because the Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in taxing

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 1198 / 2010HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

CIT vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 842 / 2011HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

C.I.T vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO. PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 731 / 2008HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/53/2000HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 53 / 2000HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO. P.LTD.

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 482 / 2008HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO.P.LTD.

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 1191 / 2008HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III vs. M/S SHANKAR TRADING CO.P.LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 1207 / 2005HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S SHANKAR TRADING CO. P. LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 247 / 2002HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO. P. LTD.

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 361 / 2008HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 1183 / 2010HC Delhi09 Jul 2012
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra and Ms Kavita JhaFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal and Ms Suruchi Aggarwal
Section 201

151 ITR 726 (P&H) & CIT v. Karam Chand Prem Chand (P) Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Guj.). 27. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that since elimination of competition from the Trust did not happen simultaneous with acquisition of Katha and Cutch business of the Trust, enhancement of lease rent, even to the extent it is attributable to elimination