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.

2 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 11clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,697Delhi1,384Chennai874Bangalore708Karnataka597Ahmedabad544Pune518Kolkata337Jaipur330Hyderabad224Chandigarh156Cochin145Rajkot126Indore119Surat118Amritsar115Lucknow90Visakhapatnam80Cuttack74Nagpur59Allahabad53Raipur51Agra50Patna37Jodhpur37Telangana36Calcutta32SC22Ranchi22Panaji16Guwahati15Dehradun15Varanasi14Kerala13Jabalpur11Punjab & Haryana9Rajasthan8Orissa6Himachal Pradesh2Andhra Pradesh2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1J&K1

Key Topics

Section 260A2Section 1482Section 12A2Exemption2Addition to Income2

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. THE TIBETIAN CHILDREN VILLAGE

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/29/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with
Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

11 of the Act. 7. The cases of the assessee were, however, re-opened under Section 147 of the Act for the said assessment years on the ground that the assessee had earmarked funds amounting to 6 Rs.20,66,74,263/- for the assessment year 2004-05 under the head ‘Fund Pending Utilization’ and had not included in receipts

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. THE TIBETIAN CHILDREN VILLAGE

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/31/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with
Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

11 of the Act. 7. The cases of the assessee were, however, re-opened under Section 147 of the Act for the said assessment years on the ground that the assessee had earmarked funds amounting to 6 Rs.20,66,74,263/- for the assessment year 2004-05 under the head ‘Fund Pending Utilization’ and had not included in receipts