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.

525 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 25(8)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi525Mumbai504Karnataka475Chennai344Bangalore251Jaipur150Ahmedabad139Pune110Hyderabad109Kolkata108Chandigarh90Lucknow60Cochin59Amritsar39Cuttack38Indore35Rajkot28Visakhapatnam25Nagpur23Allahabad21Surat20Telangana18Agra17Calcutta16Raipur15SC11Jodhpur11Kerala7Varanasi6Patna6Dehradun6Rajasthan5Punjab & Haryana4Andhra Pradesh2Panaji2Jabalpur2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 12A118Section 1189Exemption59Addition to Income45Section 143(3)31Charitable Trust28Section 1027Section 80G23Section 11(1)(d)23

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION

ITA-808/2017HC Delhi31 May 2024
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(3)(c)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

b) of sub-section (2) of Section 11 apart from the procedure laid down by clause (a) of Section 11(2) being followed by the assessee-Trust. To highlight this point we may take an illustration. If Rs 1,00,000 are earned as the total income of the previous year by the Trust from property held by it wholly

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION

Showing 1–20 of 525 · Page 1 of 27

...
Section 2(15)21
Section 13(3)18
Disallowance18
ITA/808/2017HC Delhi31 May 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(3)(c)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

b) of sub-section (2) of Section 11 apart from the procedure laid down by clause (a) of Section 11(2) being followed by the assessee-Trust. To highlight this point we may take an illustration. If Rs 1,00,000 are earned as the total income of the previous year by the Trust from property held by it wholly

RICHMOND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

ITA 4779/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

b) the trust or institution has not complied with the requirement of any other law, as referred to in sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of sub-section (1), and the order, direction or decree, by whatever name called, holding that such non- compliance has occurred, has either not been disputed or has attained finality, then, the Principal Commissioner

SARASWATHI AMMAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRE CIRCLE II, NOIDA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2181/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

b) or clause (c), as the case may be, of sub-section (1) of section 132-A, had been found in the possession or control of that person in the course of a search under section 132.” 26. Admittedly all the alleged incriminating material was found and seized from the possession of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan during the search conducted

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2291/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

b) or clause (c), as the case may be, of sub-section (1) of section 132-A, had been found in the possession or control of that person in the course of a search under section 132.” 26. Admittedly all the alleged incriminating material was found and seized from the possession of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan during the search conducted

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, , CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2288/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

b) or clause (c), as the case may be, of sub-section (1) of section 132-A, had been found in the possession or control of that person in the course of a search under section 132.” 26. Admittedly all the alleged incriminating material was found and seized from the possession of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan during the search conducted

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2289/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

b) or clause (c), as the case may be, of sub-section (1) of section 132-A, had been found in the possession or control of that person in the course of a search under section 132.” 26. Admittedly all the alleged incriminating material was found and seized from the possession of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan during the search conducted

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2291/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi03 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

b) or clause (c), as the case may be, of sub-section (1) of section 132-A, had been found in the possession or control of that person in the course of a search under section 132.” 26. Admittedly all the alleged incriminating material was found and seized from the possession of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan during the search conducted

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2290/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi03 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

b) or clause (c), as the case may be, of sub-section (1) of section 132-A, had been found in the possession or control of that person in the course of a search under section 132.” 26. Admittedly all the alleged incriminating material was found and seized from the possession of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan during the search conducted

GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-27, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6054/DEL/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2020

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 6054/Del./2018 : Asstt. Year : Gian Sagar Educational & Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Charitable Trust, Flat No. 509, Tax, Central Circle-27, 5Th Floor, Indraprakash Building, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5827B Assessee By : Sh. Amol Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Sunita Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.09.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Amol Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

8 Gian Sagar Educational & Charitable Trust the New Delhi and consequently, Shri Ketan Desai was discharged by the Hon’ble Court. 25. It was argued that at time of first inspection on 11/12.01.2010, 14 deficiencies including the non availability of auditorium was pointed out, however, on 27.02.2010 when the Gian Sagar Medical College and Hospital submitted compliance report

BHAGWANT SINGH CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6920/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. A. K. Batra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(c)Section 164(2)Section 2(15)

8. In the event of withdrawal of any student from the School, the Caution Money or any other refundable deposit becoming refundable to such a student shall be paid by BSCT on behalf of RPSS from the imprest account referred to in clause 5 herein above and the deficiency if any shall be met by RPSS by way depositing

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. ANIKA INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,

ITA/99/2018HC Delhi31 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 32Section 80G

8. As to the question whether the Management can be exempted under section 32(v)(c) of the Act, the Tribunal held as under:- “12. So far as the question, whether the management can be said to be exempted U/Sec, 33 (5)(c) of the Payment of-Bonus Digitally Signed By:JITENDRA Signing Date:30.05.2023 16:16:35 Signature

INCOME TAX OFFICER(E) WARD- 2(4), NEW DELHI, CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI vs. PRAKASH SEWA TRUST, PASCHIM VIHAR

ITA 4305/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

8 can be denied when no activities can not be a reason for charitable activity is carried | denial of exemption u/s 11. out by appellant trust ? 7.4/page Whether AO cannot dictate | Held break in carrying out the 8/9 the appellant trust whether it | activities can not be a reason for can sale its trust property

LALA SHER SINGH MEMORIAL JEEVAN VIGYAN TRUST SOCIETY,DELHI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL)-3, JHANDEWALAN NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the assessees‟ appeals are allowed

ITA 10/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshlala Sher Singh Memorial Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society, Jhandewalan, New Plot No. 18, Sector-22, Phase-1, Delhi Dwarka, Delhi-110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaal2241H Jindal Charitable Society, Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Ps-2, C-3, Block, Phase-Ii, Jhandewalan, New Ashok Vihar, Delhi- 110052 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatj0588L Florence Nighingale Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Educational Society, Jhandewalan, New Sector-16B, Phase-I, Haf Delhi Pocket-A, Sector-22, Delhi- 110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaaf1097R

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jintender Singh, CIT DR
Section 119Section 12ASection 132Section 80G

25. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. The facts of ITA No. 20/Del/2025 are taken up for adjudication and decision rendered thereon shall apply mutatis mutandis for other assessees also in view of identical facts except with variance

FLORENCE NIGHTINGALE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,DELHI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-3, DELHI

In the result, the assessees‟ appeals are allowed

ITA 19/DEL/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshlala Sher Singh Memorial Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society, Jhandewalan, New Plot No. 18, Sector-22, Phase-1, Delhi Dwarka, Delhi-110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaal2241H Jindal Charitable Society, Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Ps-2, C-3, Block, Phase-Ii, Jhandewalan, New Ashok Vihar, Delhi- 110052 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatj0588L Florence Nighingale Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Educational Society, Jhandewalan, New Sector-16B, Phase-I, Haf Delhi Pocket-A, Sector-22, Delhi- 110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaaf1097R

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jintender Singh, CIT DR
Section 119Section 12ASection 132Section 80G

25. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. The facts of ITA No. 20/Del/2025 are taken up for adjudication and decision rendered thereon shall apply mutatis mutandis for other assessees also in view of identical facts except with variance

JINDAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY,DELHI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-3, DELHI

In the result, the assessees‟ appeals are allowed

ITA 20/DEL/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshlala Sher Singh Memorial Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society, Jhandewalan, New Plot No. 18, Sector-22, Phase-1, Delhi Dwarka, Delhi-110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaal2241H Jindal Charitable Society, Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Ps-2, C-3, Block, Phase-Ii, Jhandewalan, New Ashok Vihar, Delhi- 110052 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatj0588L Florence Nighingale Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Educational Society, Jhandewalan, New Sector-16B, Phase-I, Haf Delhi Pocket-A, Sector-22, Delhi- 110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaaf1097R

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jintender Singh, CIT DR
Section 119Section 12ASection 132Section 80G

25. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. The facts of ITA No. 20/Del/2025 are taken up for adjudication and decision rendered thereon shall apply mutatis mutandis for other assessees also in view of identical facts except with variance

M/S GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3801/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. Gian Sagar Educational Vs. Dcit & Charitable Trust, Central Circle-29, Sco 10-110, Sector 43B, New Delhi Chandigarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaatg5827B

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvFor Respondent: Md. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR
Section 115Section 115BSection 133(6)

b) The provision of section 12(1) of the Income Tax Act states as under- "Any voluntary contributions received by a trust created wholly for charitable or religious purposes or by an institution established wholly for such purposes (not being contributions made with a specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus of the trust or institution) shall

PATANJALI YOGPEETH (NYAS),DELHI vs. ADIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2267/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri N. C. Swain, CIT [DR]
Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 13Section 142Section 2(15)

section 142(2A) while confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in denying exemption under sections 11/12 of the Act. 8.2 The ld. AR on queries raised by the Bench responded that assessee trust is not running shops or distribution of products and for those shoppings and distribution and selling of products, as on commercial basis different entity is there

ACIT (EXEMPTION), GHAZIABAD vs. M/S. DIVYA YOG MANDIR TRUST,, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 745/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishia Y 2010-11 Acit (Exemption) Vs Divya Yog Mandir Trust Circle, Cgo-1 Kripalu Bag, Hapur Road, Kankhal, Haridwar Ghaziabad (Pan Aaatd1114E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. Rohit Jain, Advocate
Section 11Section 12Section 143Section 2(15)

8. The Ld. AR Sh. Rohit Jain, Advocate submitted that issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 84 taxman.com 54. He further submitted that in assessee’s own case the coordinate bench has decided the issue and now it is squarely covered by the order

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAY TRUST

Inasmuch as all that is required is for the settler of the trust to declare that the

ITA/309/2003HC Delhi20 Nov 2012
Section 11Section 260A

b) of the Act and to this extent the benefit of the exemption was not available. To this extent his view was the same as the view of his predecessor for the assessment year 1989-90. However, he proceeded to examine the case in the light of the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Thanthi Trust