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.

54 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 253clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka427Mumbai116Ahmedabad67Chennai54Delhi54Bangalore48Pune29Jaipur28Indore27Allahabad23Surat20Hyderabad20Kolkata19Chandigarh17Calcutta16Cuttack15Rajkot15Amritsar13Lucknow12Dehradun4Cochin4Agra3Kerala3Nagpur3Panaji3Patna3SC3Telangana3Rajasthan2Varanasi2Raipur2Jodhpur1Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 1143Section 12A23Exemption23Section 143(3)22Addition to Income19Section 2(15)18Section 15415Charitable Trust14Section 13(3)12

ACIT, MEERUT vs. M/S. SPACE AGE RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST, MEERUT

In the result Ground No. 1 and 3 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed and ground No

ITA 4622/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Space Age Research & Vs. Circle-2, Meerut Technology Foundation, Charitable Trust, Railway Road, Meerut Pan: Aabts7321M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DR
Section 13(2)Section 13(3)Section 68

charitable or religious institution, any income thereof, if for any period during the previous year- (i) any funds of the trust or institution are invested or deposited after the 28th day of February, 1983, otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11 ; or (ii) any funds

Showing 1–20 of 54 · Page 1 of 3

Disallowance11
Section 1310
Depreciation9

ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1131/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2871/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that

IILM FOUNDAION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1142/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2675/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2872/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that

HARISH CHAND RAM KALI CHARITABLE TRUST,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee partly

ITA 4240/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishiharish Chand Ram Kali Vs. The Addl Commissioner Of Charitable Trust Income Tax Kf-91, Kavi Nagar Range-1 Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Up Up Pan: Aath3018B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri James Singdon Sr DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143Section 147Section 2

Trust versus CIT [101 ITR 234] and held that hostel running and Mess running activity cannot be stated to be educational activity because educational activity Delhi Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd Vs. ITO, means systematic education. Thereafter he proceeded to examine the expenditure of the assessee on hostel and mess activities. Thereafter, he noted that assessee has claimed ₹ 37924668/– against

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANIPAT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4667/DEL/2018[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2022AY 1994-95

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Section 144Section 154

Charitable Vs. ACIT, Trust, Circle-Panipat C/o- M/s. Sohan Lal Veer Bhan, Shop no. 50, New Wool Market, Panipat (Haryana) PAN :AAATB9939P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. K. Sampath, Advocate Sh. V. Rajkumar, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.05.2022 Date of pronouncement 27.07.2022 ORDER Captioned appeals by the same assessee arise

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2784/DEL/2012[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2022AY 1994-95

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Section 144Section 154

Charitable Vs. ACIT, Trust, Circle-Panipat C/o- M/s. Sohan Lal Veer Bhan, Shop no. 50, New Wool Market, Panipat (Haryana) PAN :AAATB9939P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. K. Sampath, Advocate Sh. V. Rajkumar, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.05.2022 Date of pronouncement 27.07.2022 ORDER Captioned appeals by the same assessee arise

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANIPAT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4666/DEL/2018[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2022AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Section 144Section 154

Charitable Vs. ACIT, Trust, Circle-Panipat C/o- M/s. Sohan Lal Veer Bhan, Shop no. 50, New Wool Market, Panipat (Haryana) PAN :AAATB9939P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. K. Sampath, Advocate Sh. V. Rajkumar, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.05.2022 Date of pronouncement 27.07.2022 ORDER Captioned appeals by the same assessee arise

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2783/DEL/2012[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2022AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Section 144Section 154

Charitable Vs. ACIT, Trust, Circle-Panipat C/o- M/s. Sohan Lal Veer Bhan, Shop no. 50, New Wool Market, Panipat (Haryana) PAN :AAATB9939P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. K. Sampath, Advocate Sh. V. Rajkumar, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.05.2022 Date of pronouncement 27.07.2022 ORDER Captioned appeals by the same assessee arise

FEDERATION OF EUROPEAN BUSINESS IN INDIA,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

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

ITA 2446/DEL/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishrafederation Of European Commissioner Of Income Business In India, Tax (Exemption), Aiwan-E-Ghalib Complex, Vs. E-2, Civic Centre, Mata Sundari Lane, Minto Road, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110002 Pan: Aafcf5934N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Amol Sinha, Advocate Sh. Ankit Kumar, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Jitender Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 15/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/12/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.03.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), New Delhi [‘Cit(E)’].

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 8

253 page 82. The Hon’ble Court has held as under: “A.3. Generally, the charging of any amount towards consideration for such an activity (advancing general public utility), which is on cost-basis or nominally above cost, cannot be considered to be trade, commerce or business or any services in relation thereto, it is only when the charges are markedly

ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. THE TIMES CENTRE FOR MEDIA AND MANAGEMENT STUDIES, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 1389/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Pramod Kumar & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavaa.Y. : 2010-11 Ito (E) The Times Centre For Ward-2(3) Media & Management Studies Vs. New Delhi 10, Daryaganj Pan : Aaact3554H

For Respondent: Sh. Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(d)Section 25

charitable or religious purposes. If such income consists of severable portions, exempt as well as tax able, the portion which is exempt is to be left out and the portion which is not exempt is charged to tax as if it is the income of an association of persons. Therefore, a proviso was inserted by the Finance Act, 1984, with

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ANGOORI DEVI EDUCATIONAL & CURTURAL SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 4886/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(E), Vs. Smt. Angoori Devi Circle-2(1), Educational & Cultural New Delhi Society, 88A, Pocket-1, Mayor Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi Pan: Aaata1505E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Pandey, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 70Section 80

section 70-74 applies to aggregation of losses and set off and carry forward of the same. Income of the trust is computed u/s 11 -13 of the act and is not hit by those provisions. Hence, we dismiss this ground of appeal holding that excess application in earlier year should be allowed for set off to the charitable trust

MALIK EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3406/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishimalik Educational Society, Vs. Addl. Cit, Iii-A-41, Nehru Nagar, Range-1, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan: Aaatm3509N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(6)Section 12Section 143

section 11 and 12 of the income tax act on surplus land of INR 2 330808 which is excess of income over expenses for the year. 14. The 3rd ground of appeal is with respect to the disallowance of depreciation on fixed assets amounting to INR 3 495190 made by the learned assessing officer. The learned assessing officer, relying

MONICA GOLD PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED,KHASRA NO. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(2), C R BUILDING

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3791/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.3791 & 3792/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 11Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 260A

charitable trust filed its return for assessment year2016-17 on 6-9-2016, declaring nil income and seeking a refund - However, assessee failed to submit Form No.lOB along with return, which was eventually filed on 15-2-2020, with a delay of approximately 1257 days - Despite explaining delay as an oversight by their Chartered I.T.A.Nos.3791 & 3792/Del/2023 Accountant/Auditor, condonation application

MONICA GOLD PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED,KHASRA NO. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(2), C R BUILDING

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3792/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.3791 & 3792/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 11Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 260A

charitable trust filed its return for assessment year2016-17 on 6-9-2016, declaring nil income and seeking a refund - However, assessee failed to submit Form No.lOB along with return, which was eventually filed on 15-2-2020, with a delay of approximately 1257 days - Despite explaining delay as an oversight by their Chartered I.T.A.Nos.3791 & 3792/Del/2023 Accountant/Auditor, condonation application

DCIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S SMT. ANGOORI DEVI EDUCATIONAL & CULTURAL SOCIETY (REGD),, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3884/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2011-12 Dcit (E) Vs. Smt. Angoori Devi Educational Circle 2 (1) & Cultural Society (Regd), New Delhi 88A, Pocket-1, Mayur Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi – 110 091 Pan Aaata1505E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Mahar
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 70

section 70-74 applies to aggregation of losses and set off and carry forward of the same. Income of the trust is computed u/s 11-13 of the Act and is not hit by those provisions. Hence, we dismiss this ground of appeal holding that excess application in earlier year should be allowed for set off to the charitable trust

SHREE DEWAN SHIKSHA SAMITI,JIND vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 8406/DEL/2019[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2024

Bench: us. Considering the fact that the assessee has been continuously absent, we find it appropriate to hear the Ld. Departmental Representative and decide the Appeal on verifying the material available on record.

Section 12ASection 80G

Section 80G of the Act despite the fact that Trust was duly registered and having charitable objects and there was nothing adverse on record about the genuineness of the activities of the Trust. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.” 2. When the matter is called neither the assessee

GAWAR FOUNDATION,HARYANA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), ROHTAK

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2808/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Gawar Foundation, Vs. Ito(Exemption), Through S. K. Jain, Advocate, Rohtak 696/8, Ganga Bagh, Hansi, Haryana Pan: Aactg1482C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Naveen Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 40

253(6)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 at Rs. 4,000/- has been deposited on 25-03-2019 with Punjab National Bank, Hisar. 5) That appeal is within limitation as order under appeal dated 31-01-2019 was served on Appellant Assessee on 12-02-2019.” 2. Brief facts of the case shows that the assessee is a charitable