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.

174 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 254(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka432Delhi174Mumbai162Surat85Chennai49Pune43Jaipur39Ahmedabad32Lucknow27Bangalore26Hyderabad23Calcutta18Chandigarh16Amritsar16Cochin9Rajkot8Telangana8Kolkata8Nagpur7SC5Cuttack5Raipur4Agra3Indore3Rajasthan3Varanasi3Allahabad2Jodhpur1Andhra Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 12A89Section 1153Addition to Income37Exemption31Section 37(1)28Section 13228Section 143(3)27Section 69A22Section 1022Disallowance

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)

2(15) of the Act. In the application filed seeking registration under section 80G, the assessee had categorically stated that the trust was pre-dominantly engaged in providing medical relief and education through propagation of yoga. It was on considering the said predominant objective of the trust that registration under section 80G(5)(vi) was granted to the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 174 · Page 1 of 9

...
21
Section 13(3)19
Search & Seizure12

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4305/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

254 (CAL). In the\ncase of DIT Vs Gemological Institute of India [2019] 105 taxmann.com 179\n(Bombay), Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that \"This in view of the\ndecision of the Apex Court in Asstt. CIT v. Surat City Gymkhana [2008] 170\nТахтап 612/300 ITR 214 to the effect that once registration is granted a trust\nunder

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)

254 that: ( SCC pp. 274-75, para 41) 6. Because the Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact ignoring the ITAT decision that Transport 8& Hostel Facilities surplus cannot be considered as Business Income of the Society if the same was an integral part of its objects.(ITANO.4639/Del/2015 Addl.CIT, Range- 1, Ghaziabad Vs. Krishna Charitable Trust

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)

254 that: ( SCC pp. 274-75, para 41) 6. Because the Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact ignoring the ITAT decision that Transport 8& Hostel Facilities surplus cannot be considered as Business Income of the Society if the same was an integral part of its objects.(ITANO.4639/Del/2015 Addl.CIT, Range- 1, Ghaziabad Vs. Krishna Charitable Trust

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. AIPECCS SOCIETY

ITA/924/2009HC Delhi07 Oct 2015
For Appellant: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent: Mr Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with
Section 10Section 158BSection 260A

254, the Supreme Court had observed that: “If the profits must necessarily feed a charitable purpose under the terms of the trust, the mere fact that the activities of the trust yield profit will not alter the charitable character of the trust. The test now is, more clearly than in the past, the genuineness of the purpose tested

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)

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

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)

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

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)

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

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)

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

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)

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

DEVKI DEVI FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. DIT (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI

ITA 1027/DEL/2012[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2019

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: -- Devki Devi Foundation, Vs Dit (Exemptions), Plot No.15, 3Rd Floor, 2, Press Enclave Road, Saket, Aayakar Bhawan, New Delhi. Laxmi Nagar District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aaatd5283G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate & Shri Deepesh Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms Nidhi Srivastava, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.10.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2011 Of The Dit (Exemptions), Delhi Withdrawing Registration Granted Earlier U/S 12A Of The It Act Since Inception.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT, DR
Section 12A

charitable purpose’ as referred to in section 2(15) and for withdrawing registration under section 12A of the Act on that basis.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee, at the time of hearing, filed the following additional grounds:- “Without prejudice: 4. That the Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), New Delhi [DIT(E)] erred on facts

PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX -EXEMPTIONS

ITA/368/2012HC Delhi19 Oct 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12A

254(2) of the Act. ITA No.368-369/2012 Page 4 of 17 4. In the result, the application is dismissed. " 6. The questions of law sought to be urged on behalf of the appellant-assessee are several in number, but the crux of the issue is whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provisions of Section

PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX - EXEMPTIONS

ITA/369/2012HC Delhi19 Oct 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12A

254(2) of the Act. ITA No.368-369/2012 Page 4 of 17 4. In the result, the application is dismissed. " 6. The questions of law sought to be urged on behalf of the appellant-assessee are several in number, but the crux of the issue is whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provisions of Section

ACIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. INDIA INTERNATIONAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5191/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Angad Gulati, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Janardan Das, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

254 : 1976 SCC (Tax) 14 : (1975) 101 ITR 234] that "if the profits must necessarily feed a charitable purpose under the terms of the trust, the mere fact that the activities of the trust yield profit will not alter the charitable character of the trust. The test now is, more clearly than in the past, the genuineness of the purpose

ARTIFICIAL LIMBS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION OF INDIA,KANPUR vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMOPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD , GHAZIABAD

In the result, we are inclined to accept the findings of Ld CIT(A) and AO

ITA 2586/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 25

Charitable Trust reported in (1995) 216 ITR 697 (SC); (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax V s. Programme for Community Organization reported in (2001) 248 ITR 1 (SC); (iv) Society of the Servants of the Holy Spirit Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) - ITA No. 975/Bang/2015 (ITAT Bangalore); and (v) DCIT Vs. Rashtrothana Parishat - ITA No. 896 & 897/Bang/2014 (ITAT Bangalore

ARTIFICIAL LIMBS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION OF INDIA,KANPUR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,EXEMPTION RANGE , GHAZIABAD

In the result, we are inclined to accept the findings of Ld CIT(A) and AO

ITA 2591/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 25

Charitable Trust reported in (1995) 216 ITR 697 (SC); (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax V s. Programme for Community Organization reported in (2001) 248 ITR 1 (SC); (iv) Society of the Servants of the Holy Spirit Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) - ITA No. 975/Bang/2015 (ITAT Bangalore); and (v) DCIT Vs. Rashtrothana Parishat - ITA No. 896 & 897/Bang/2014 (ITAT Bangalore

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CGO COMPLEX, HAPUR CHUNGI vs. KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MOTIJHEEL, KANPUR

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4580/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(15)

254. In accordance with the foregoing discussion, and summary of\nconclusions the numerous appeals are disposed of as follows: (i) The\nrevenue's appeals against the Improvement Trust, Moga, the Hoshiarpur\nImprovement Trust, Bathinda Improvement Trust, Fazilka Improvement\nTrust Sangrur Improvement Trust Patiala Improvement Trust Jalandhar\nImprovement Trust Kapurthala Improvement Trust, Pathankot\nImprovement Trust Improvement Trust, Hansi, and the Special

DCIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI vs. NEW DELHI YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION (YMCA), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4983/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2012-13] The D.C.I.T[E] Vs. New Delhi Young Men’S Circle – 2(1) Christian Association Ltd New Delhi 1, Jai Singh Road, Connaught Place New Delhi Pan : Aaatn 1200 H Co No. 83/Del/2016 (A/O Ita No. 4983/Del/2015 [Assessment Year: 2012-13]) New Delhi Young Men’S Vs. The D.C.I.T[E] Christian Association Ltd Circle – 2(1) 1, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi Connaught Place New Delhi Pan : Aaatn 1200 H [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Adv Shri V. Rajakumar, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)Section 2(15)

charitable organization while it was promoting religion. The benefits proposed by the Association of providing relief to the poor and medical relief and education were constrained by virtue of the objects of the Association. Relying upon the decisions in Mohidin Trust V. CIT (2001) 248 ITR 587 (J&K) and CIT v. Palghat Shadi Mahal Trust (2002) 254

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAHARAJI EDUCATION TRUST, GHAZIABAD

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 5138/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, C. AFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas[CIT]–
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

charitable trust carrying on activities in the field of education. It is a part of Santosh Group, which is also engaged in the field of education in Medical, Dental, Para-medical and other courses. For AY 2007-08, assessee filed its return of income on 31st October, 2007 4. stating that it has excess of expenditure over income amounting

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DLF LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3061/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 146Section 250

Section 41(1) the assessee should have obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever, any amount in respect of the loss or expenditure earlier allowed as a deduction. This part of the reasoning, in the light of the amended clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 41 may not be relevant after substitution of the said