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.

345 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 36(1)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka468Delhi345Mumbai329Bangalore138Chennai135Jaipur89Hyderabad80Ahmedabad71Pune47Chandigarh45Indore42Kolkata39Lucknow34Cochin27Allahabad21Amritsar20Visakhapatnam16Calcutta16Cuttack16Agra14Surat12Patna10Nagpur8Rajkot7Varanasi7Telangana7Raipur6SC6Kerala5Rajasthan3Jodhpur3Punjab & Haryana2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 12A81Section 1163Addition to Income55Section 2(15)39Section 143(3)37Exemption37Section 69A33Section 13227Disallowance25Section 37(1)

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

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4779/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2024-25
For Respondent: \nShri Gaurav Jain, Adv
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

iii), sub-clause\n(iv) or sub-clause (v);\n(vii) any lineal descendant of a brother or sister of either the individual or of the\nspouse of the individual.\nExplanation 2.—...........\nExplanation 3.—For the purposes of this section, a person shall be deemed to have a\nsubstantial interest in a concern, —\n(i) in a case where

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , ITO C.R. BUILDING vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 345 · Page 1 of 18

...
24
Section 11(1)(d)22
Deduction19
ITA 577/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n“The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

ITA 579/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n•\n“The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

REC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT-10 (OSD), DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 320/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n“The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

REC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT-10 (OSD), DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 319/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n•\n“The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , CR BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

ITA 578/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n\"The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. SERVICES COMPANIES

In the result the appeals are disposed of as above with no order as to

ITA/17/2011HC Delhi10 May 2012
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 260A

charitable purposes. The substantial question of law is thus answered in favour of the assessee in so far as the payment of taxes under the VDIS is concerned and in favour of the Revenue so far as the expenditure incurred outside India (Germany) is concerned. 32. The next question which arises is regarding the applicability of Section 28(iii

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOFTWARE AND SERVICE COMPANIES (NASSCOM)

In the result the appeals are disposed of as above with no order as to

ITA - 17 / 2011HC Delhi10 May 2012
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 260A

charitable purposes. The substantial question of law is thus answered in favour of the assessee in so far as the payment of taxes under the VDIS is concerned and in favour of the Revenue so far as the expenditure incurred outside India (Germany) is concerned. 32. The next question which arises is regarding the applicability of Section 28(iii

LAKHMI CHAND CHARITABLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT CENTRAL 3, NEW DELHI

ITA 1803/DEL/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Ms.Madhumita Roylakhmi Chand Vs. Principal Commissioner Charitable Society, Of Income Tax, Central-3 Elephanta Lane, Behind Room No. 325, 3Rd Floor, Sector-10/6 Market, New Income Tax Building, E-3 Golak Dham, Sector-10, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Dwarka, Extension, New Delhi - 110075 New Delhi - 110055

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty
Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12(1)Section 127(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 246ASection 80G

36. As held in Islamic Education (supra), if there is any violation in the previous year 2020-21 relating to AY 2021-22, this cannot be a reason to cancel the registration granted for AY 2022-23 to AY 2026-27 as the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 12AB(4)(ii) of the Act is wrong (relevant para

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 3386/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80I

iii) of sub-section (4) or generates power or commences transmission or distribution of power or undertakes substantial renovation and modernisation of the existing transmission or distribution lines : Provided that where the assessee develops or operates and maintains or develops, operates and maintains any infrastructure facility referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of the Explanation

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 3304/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80I

iii) of sub-section (4) or generates power or commences transmission or distribution of power or undertakes substantial renovation and modernisation of the existing transmission or distribution lines : Provided that where the assessee develops or operates and maintains or develops, operates and maintains any infrastructure facility referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of the Explanation

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

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 u/s 132 of the Act at his residence. Those incriminating documents are written

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

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 u/s 132 of the Act at his residence. Those incriminating documents are written

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

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 u/s 132 of the Act at his residence. Those incriminating documents are written

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

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 u/s 132 of the Act at his residence. Those incriminating documents are written

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

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 u/s 132 of the Act at his residence. Those incriminating documents are written

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

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 u/s 132 of the Act at his residence. Those incriminating documents are written

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-25(1), NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. TECHNO TREXIM INDIA PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 582/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 37

36(1)(iii) or section 37 of the Act.\nb. The view taken by the AO during the year under consideration is against the\nprinciples of consistency. Even when the impugned assessment order was passed\non 28-12-2018 that was never relied upon either before the CIT(A) in respect of\nAY 2015-16 when CIT(A) passed order

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

iii. Prof. A. K. Agrawal, Add. Director General Health Services, New Delhi 16. The terms of reference of the committee was to examine the validity/correctness of the recommendation made by the MCI on 05.04.2010 recommending renewal of permission for the admission of 4th batch of 100 MBBS students at Gian Sagar Medical College and Hospital, Patiala for the academic year

TECHNO TREXIM (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 25(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 468/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 37

36(1)(iii) or section 37 of the Act.\nb. The view taken by the AO during the year under consideration is against the\nprinciples of consistency. Even when the impugned assessment order was passed\non 28-12-2018 that was never relied upon either before the CIT(A) in respect of\nAY 2015-16 when CIT(A) passed order