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.

6 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 193clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka445Delhi176Mumbai99Bangalore43Chandigarh25Ahmedabad23Chennai23Jaipur19Cuttack19Kolkata17Calcutta16Lucknow15Pune15Amritsar11Indore9Hyderabad6Cochin4Telangana3SC3Raipur3Rajkot2Rajasthan2Surat2Visakhapatnam1Dehradun1Andhra Pradesh1Nagpur1Ranchi1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 119Section 153A7Section 80I6Section 143(3)5Section 1394Section 139(1)3Section 1323Exemption3Addition to Income3

ACIT., EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. PHARMACEUTICALS EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL OF INDIA, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

ITA 1199/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. Pharmaceuticals Export Of Income Tax, Promotion Council Of India, Exemptions, Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcp4643C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rv. Chalam, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Balakrishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri RV. Chalam, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Balakrishna, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12(1)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144

193 ITR 321 the expenditure incurred by it outside India for charitable or religious purpose in India ought to be treated as application of Income in India for the purpose of section 11 of the Act. 6 5.1.7. Further, in the case of DDIT(Exemptions) vs Ohio University Christ College hon’ble ITAT Bengalore Bench

Section 144C(5)2
Transfer Pricing2

DEVGEN SEEDS AND CROP TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-17(1) HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 187/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.Chandra Sekhar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

charitable trust was upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court (see paragraph 13 at page 177). The Appellant urges that based on the correct factual position it shall be open to the Tribunal to take a different view. In this regard, your attention is also invited to the following observations of Mr P N Bhagwari in the case of Distributor

DEVGEM SEEDS AND CROP TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 2225/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.Chandra Sekhar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

charitable trust was upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court (see paragraph 13 at page 177). The Appellant urges that based on the correct factual position it shall be open to the Tribunal to take a different view. In this regard, your attention is also invited to the following observations of Mr P N Bhagwari in the case of Distributor

DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, HYDERABAD vs. HYDERABAD METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 326/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya –
Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)

trust / authority in spending the amount(s) is not in accordance with its objects. 4) CIT(A) erred in not considering the fact that the receipt of Rs.545,15,27,213/- under layout regulation scheme is a part and partial of the assessee authority besides the fact that the assessee is in receipt of the same. 5) CIT(A) ought

HYDERABAD METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 271/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya –
Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)

trust / authority in spending the amount(s) is not in accordance with its objects. 4) CIT(A) erred in not considering the fact that the receipt of Rs.545,15,27,213/- under layout regulation scheme is a part and partial of the assessee authority besides the fact that the assessee is in receipt of the same. 5) CIT(A) ought

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1717/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.K. ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Smt. Mamata Choudhary
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

193 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Court held that upon perusal of the original order of assessment and the order of reassessment under section 147, it was clear that the later makes a fresh assessment of the entire income of the respondent/ assessee and hence, the Hon'ble High Court was right in proceeding on the basis that the earlier