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 253(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka427Mumbai116Ahmedabad67Chennai54Delhi54Bangalore46Pune29Jaipur28Indore27Allahabad23Surat20Hyderabad20Kolkata19Chandigarh17Calcutta16Cuttack15Rajkot15Amritsar13Lucknow12Dehradun4Cochin4Agra3Kerala3Nagpur3Panaji3Patna3SC3Telangana3Rajasthan2Varanasi2Raipur2Jodhpur1Andhra 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

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

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

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

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

5) read with section 13(1)(d) by the assessee-trust attracts the maximum marginal rate of tax on the entire income of the trust ?" The Bombay High Court held that in case of contravention of section 13(1)(d), the maximum marginal rate of tax under section 164(2), proviso is applicable only to that part of income

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

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

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

5. The learned assessing officer noted that the assessee has not maintained separate books of account of hostel activity as assessee is running a hostel and every year surplus is generated. The learned assessing officer noted that, undoubtedly, certain condition has been fixed for maintaining the hostel to certain extent by AICTE [All India Council for Technical Education] but nowhere

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

5. Confederation of Pharma Dealers Association [2022] 137 Taxmann.com 117 (Raipur-Trib.) 6. Dahisar Sports Foundation [2017] 87 Taxmann.com 313 (Mum-Trib.) 7. Further, the Ld. Counsel placed emphasis on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Indian Chamber of Commerce (supra) and in particular para 9, 13 and 16 of the said order, which read as under

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

5. Thus on both the counts he allowed the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, the Id AO has preferred this appeal. 6. The first ground of appeal is relating to allowing the claim of carry forward of excess expenditure incurred of the assessee. The Id DR vehemently stated that as the assessee has not filed its return of income within

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

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

5. The first ground of appeal of the assessee is against the confirmation of the disallowance of salary to employees amounting to ₹ 1 569560/–. During the course of assessment proceedings, the learned assessing officer examined the expenditure of salary payment made by the assessee. The learned assessing officer asked for certain details with respect to the employees. According

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

5 and 6] [In favour of assessee/ matter remanded] II. A1 Jamia Mohammediyah Education Society vs CIT(E) [2024] 162 taxmann.com 114 (Bombay HC) Section 119, read with section 11, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Central Board of Direct Taxes- Instructions to subordinate authorities (Condonation of delay in filing Form 10B) -Assessment year 2016- 17 - Assessee, a charitable trust

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

5 and 6] [In favour of assessee/ matter remanded] II. A1 Jamia Mohammediyah Education Society vs CIT(E) [2024] 162 taxmann.com 114 (Bombay HC) Section 119, read with section 11, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Central Board of Direct Taxes- Instructions to subordinate authorities (Condonation of delay in filing Form 10B) -Assessment year 2016- 17 - Assessee, a charitable trust

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

SAMSUNG C AND T CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT CIRCLE 22(2) DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 2184/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

253 ITR 749 (Guj.) 2. United Glass Manufacturing Co. Ltd., 28 Taxmann.com 429 (SC) 3. Ansal Housing Limited 153 Taxmann.com 102 (Del-ITAT) 4. SCV & LLP Vs. DCIT, ITA No.1756/Del/2020, dated 17.08.2022 5. Samtel Colour Ltd., (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Delhi) 6. S.R.F. Charitable Trust Vs. Union of India