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.

8 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 264clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka496Mumbai178Bangalore101Delhi97Chennai54Pune29Ahmedabad28Chandigarh16Calcutta16Jaipur14Kolkata13Lucknow10Hyderabad8Surat7Indore7Varanasi4Amritsar4Telangana4Cochin3Allahabad3Rajasthan2Rajkot2Cuttack2Patna2Punjab & Haryana1Agra1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 12A15Exemption7Section 2505Penalty5Section 143(1)4Section 271D4Section 1544Section 234E4Section 143(3)4

HYDERABAD SCIENCE SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1128/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1128/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Hyderabad Science Society, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Vs. Pin - 500 028. Exemption Circle-1(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaath3789F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca For Revenue : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)

trust or institution as are material for the purpose of 23 ITA.No.1128/Hyd./2024 achieving its objectives as mentioned in section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) (B) of the Act. However, in the present case, the Id. PCIT invoked the provisions of section 12AB(4)(a)(ii) of the Act as stood in the assessment year 2022-23. The objection

Section 104
Condonation of Delay4
Addition to Income3

ANDHRA PRADESH POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1805/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Years: 2013-14 Andhra Pradesh Power Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Finance Corporation Ltd., Ward – 1(2), Hyderabad. Vijayawada. Pan – Aadca0857D Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram Revenue By: Shri K. Mohan Reddy Date Of Hearing: 15/01/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/01/2019 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am:

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri K. Mohan Reddy
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80G

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and hence, disallowed an amount of Rs. 72,25,048/- and for the balance amount of Rs. 58,97,216/- was disallowed on the ground that the assessee failed to submit any information. The total disallowance comes to Rs 1,31,22,264/-. 3. Aggrieved with the order of AO, the assessee preferred

VAGDEVI REDDY TANDUR,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 505/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Muttha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy
Section 195Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under: "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate

SRISAILA KSHETRA YOGI VEMA REDDY NITHYANNADANA SATRAM,KURNOOL vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, TIRUPATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 430/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Srisaila Kshetra Yogi Vema Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Reddy Nityannadana Satram, Tirupati. Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh. Pan : Aadts7734G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Gbs Maitreya Revenue By: Ms. Reema Yadav. Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023

For Appellant: Shri GBS MaitreyaFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav
Section 10Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 5

Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under:"In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 972/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.972 & 973/Hyd/2024

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

264/- which was spent for the aims and that there is no excess of receipts over expenditure either to be taxed or to be exempted. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee has duly complied with the provisions of Sec 11 of the Act in all the previous years and that

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1300/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.972 & 973/Hyd/2024

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

264/- which was spent for the aims and that there is no excess of receipts over expenditure either to be taxed or to be exempted. 5.2. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee has duly complied with the provisions of Sec 11 of the Act in all the previous years

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 973/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.972 & 973/Hyd/2024

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

264/- which was spent for the aims and that there is no excess of receipts over expenditure either to be taxed or to be exempted. 5.2. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee has duly complied with the provisions of Sec 11 of the Act in all the previous years

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1301/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.972 & 973/Hyd/2024

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

264/- which was spent for the aims and that there is no excess of receipts over expenditure either to be taxed or to be exempted. 5.2. Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee has duly complied with the provisions of Sec 11 of the Act in all the previous years