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.

11 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 153Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai32Bangalore24Allahabad16Pune11Chennai11Delhi11Jaipur10Chandigarh10Agra4Dehradun4Lucknow2Hyderabad1

Key Topics

Section 26335Section 153C27Section 80I20Section 40A(3)15Section 153A12Addition to Income11Disallowance7Deduction5Search & Seizure5

KAILASH GAHLOT,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as above

ITA 3431/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.3431/Del./2023, A.Y. 2015-16 Kailash Gahlot Deputy Commissioner Of C-6/6172, Vasant Kunj, Income Tax, New Delhi Vs. Central Circle-4, Pan: Aajpg2849N New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Vinod Kumar Bindal, Ca Sh. Anmol Jha, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal Of The Assessee For Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.09.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 153DSection 69C

charitable trust was created by the appellant and his family members. The trust is running a school named Shri Ram International School where Shri Rohit Sharma is apparently working. The address of the author on the diary is the address of the appellant. The mobile no. 9810032340 written on the first of the diary belongs to Shri Rohit Kailash Gahlot

Natural Justice5
Section 14A4
Section 694

VIMALARJUN TRUST,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2094/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year 2017-18 Vimalarjun Trust, Vs. Acit, 2/652, Vikram Khand, Gomti Circle-2, Nagar, Lucknow Delhi Uttar Pradesh Pin: 226010 Pan No. Aabtv7815R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advs. & Shri PawanFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kaushal, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 250

Trust. After recording satisfaction by the Ld. AO of the assessee proceedings under Section 153C of the Act were initiated. Notice under Section 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act dated 31.12.2020 was issued. In response to the notice under Section 153C of the Act, 2 the assessee filed return of income on 04.01.2021 declaring total income at Rs. Nil. Notice

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3136/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

153D of the Act, the approval so granted is also erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The same is hereby set aside to be granted afresh as per provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 12. After perusing the above, at the threshold, we find that that there is no dispute with regard to the following position

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3135/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

153D of the Act, the approval so granted is also erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The same is hereby set aside to be granted afresh as per provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 12. After perusing the above, at the threshold, we find that that there is no dispute with regard to the following position

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3132/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

153D of the Act, the approval so granted is also erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The same is hereby set aside to be granted afresh as per provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 12. After perusing the above, at the threshold, we find that that there is no dispute with regard to the following position

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3133/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

153D of the Act, the approval so granted is also erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The same is hereby set aside to be granted afresh as per provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 12. After perusing the above, at the threshold, we find that that there is no dispute with regard to the following position

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3134/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

153D of the Act, the approval so granted is also erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The same is hereby set aside to be granted afresh as per provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 12. After perusing the above, at the threshold, we find that that there is no dispute with regard to the following position

RAGHAV KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 3215/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

153D of the Income tax Act, 1961 before passing of assessment order u/s 153C for AY 2020-21 and 2021-22. 9. However, it was submitted that the assessing officer failed to provide the documents at serial no. ‘b(ii), c, e, g, h’ and ‘i’, which has direct relevance or bearing to the issue under consideration

RAGHAV KUMAR,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 29, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 3214/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

153D of the Income tax Act, 1961 before passing of assessment order u/s 153C for AY 2020-21 and 2021-22. 9. However, it was submitted that the assessing officer failed to provide the documents at serial no. ‘b(ii), c, e, g, h’ and ‘i’, which has direct relevance or bearing to the issue under consideration

FIITJEE LIMITED.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed partly

ITA 333/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate; &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 153A

section 11 and 12 of the Act. The ground No. 4 of the appeal is accordingly dismissed.” ITAs No.333 & 334/Del/2021 7.10 As the aforesaid observations of the coordinate Bench are taken into consideration, it establishes that it is not out of any misconception of law that the impugned sums received were offered as income, but, it is more

FIITJEE LIMITED.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed partly

ITA 334/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate; &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 153A

section 11 and 12 of the Act. The ground No. 4 of the appeal is accordingly dismissed.” ITAs No.333 & 334/Del/2021 7.10 As the aforesaid observations of the coordinate Bench are taken into consideration, it establishes that it is not out of any misconception of law that the impugned sums received were offered as income, but, it is more