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.

27 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 56(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka460Delhi374Mumbai277Bangalore135Chennai107Jaipur80Hyderabad73Ahmedabad71Pune58Chandigarh49Cochin43Lucknow39Kolkata32Indore27Amritsar19Visakhapatnam19Calcutta18Nagpur17Agra13Rajkot10Allahabad10Telangana8Patna7Surat6Kerala5Cuttack5SC5Varanasi5Rajasthan3Raipur3Dehradun2Guwahati1Orissa1Ranchi1Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 12A84Section 1148Section 143(3)28Section 1020Exemption19Disallowance16Section 2(15)15Section 143(1)14Addition to Income14

M/S. MADHYA PRADESH CRICKET ASSOCIATION,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed and consequently the order of the Ld

ITA 782/IND/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaassessment Year: 2012-13 Madhya Pradesh Cricket Dcit, 1(1), Association Indore बनाम/ Holkar Stadium, Vs. 7, Race Course Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aaatg3527C Appellant By Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Shri Arpit Gaur (Ar) Revenue By Shri Lal Chand (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 21.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.06.2017

Section 13Section 2Section 2(15)

Charitable Purpose’ which is the last limb of section 2(15) of the Act. 32. In the light of above organizational structure developed in India for development and promotion of game of cricket, we may point out that during the period under consideration pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 the assessee hosted two IPL 52 M.P. Cricket Association matches on behalf

M/S MADHYA PRADESH MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

Section 80G12
Section 13(8)12
Deduction9

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 280/IND/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 220(2)

56. In G.S. 1's case (supra) it was contended by the revenue that GS1 (India) had acquired intellectual property rights from GS1 (Belgium) and thereafter received registration fees from third parties in India. This was sought to be equated to royalty payments. It was also contended that GS1 (India) had huge surpluses of receipts over expenditure and that payments

M/S MADHYA PRADESH MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT, BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 692/IND/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 220(2)

56. In G.S. 1's case (supra) it was contended by the revenue that GS1 (India) had acquired intellectual property rights from GS1 (Belgium) and thereafter received registration fees from third parties in India. This was sought to be equated to royalty payments. It was also contended that GS1 (India) had huge surpluses of receipts over expenditure and that payments

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 425/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

56. In G.S. 1's case (supra) it was contended by the revenue that GS1 (India) had acquired intellectual property rights from GS1 (Belgium) and thereafter received registration fees from third parties in India. This was sought to be equated to royalty payments. It was also contended that GS1 (India) had huge surpluses of receipts over expenditure and that payments

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 427/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

56. In G.S. 1's case (supra) it was contended by the revenue that GS1 (India) had acquired intellectual property rights from GS1 (Belgium) and thereafter received registration fees from third parties in India. This was sought to be equated to royalty payments. It was also contended that GS1 (India) had huge surpluses of receipts over expenditure and that payments

M/S M.P. MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 422/IND/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

56. In G.S. 1's case (supra) it was contended by the revenue that GS1 (India) had acquired intellectual property rights from GS1 (Belgium) and thereafter received registration fees from third parties in India. This was sought to be equated to royalty payments. It was also contended that GS1 (India) had huge surpluses of receipts over expenditure and that payments

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 423/IND/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

56. In G.S. 1's case (supra) it was contended by the revenue that GS1 (India) had acquired intellectual property rights from GS1 (Belgium) and thereafter received registration fees from third parties in India. This was sought to be equated to royalty payments. It was also contended that GS1 (India) had huge surpluses of receipts over expenditure and that payments

M/S SHREE JAIRAM EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. ACIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 548/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37

trust society, the same will be dealt while dealing with the assesee’s appeal in ITANo.548/Ind/2019 wherein the assessee has challenged the finding of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the action of the Ld. AO of making certain additions based on the loose papers and treating the assessee as carrying out business and not carrying out charitable activities

M/S SHREE JAIRAM EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 90/IND/2019[-]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2021

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37

trust society, the same will be dealt while dealing with the assesee’s appeal in ITANo.548/Ind/2019 wherein the assessee has challenged the finding of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the action of the Ld. AO of making certain additions based on the loose papers and treating the assessee as carrying out business and not carrying out charitable activities

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

ITA 232/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 115BSection 143(3)

trust based on religious tenets - Activities of trust both charitable and religious - benefits not exclusively meant for particular religious community - trust not disqualified to claim exemption - Income-tax Act, 1961." 6.Income tax Officer vs. Gaudiua Granth Anuved Trust (2014) 23 ITJ 141 (Trib.-Agra) ITAT, Agra Bench "Income – U/s 2(24) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - corpus Donation - Whether

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

ITA 776/IND/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 115BSection 143(3)

trust based on religious tenets - Activities of trust both charitable and religious - benefits not exclusively meant for particular religious community - trust not disqualified to claim exemption - Income-tax Act, 1961." 6.Income tax Officer vs. Gaudiua Granth Anuved Trust (2014) 23 ITJ 141 (Trib.-Agra) ITAT, Agra Bench "Income – U/s 2(24) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - corpus Donation - Whether

AKSHAY ACADEMY,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniakshay Academy Ito, Nfac 32 Kaimaidan Road, Delhi Khasgi Gagicha Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadta8987B Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

Section 10Section 11Section 12A

56,19,050/- which is more than the prescribed monetary limit for claiming exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act and therefore, the said claim of the assessee cannot be allowed. During the assessment proceeding the assesse’s vide letter dated 30.01.2021 explained that the claim of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act was wrongly made however

M/S. DEVI SHAKUNTALA THKARAL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT ,CENTRAL, BHOPAL

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 117/IND/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 153A

Section 127 can be exercised only when there is such an agreement, the fact that such an agreement exists ought to have been stated in the show cause notice as the same is a jurisdictional fact. Apart from the failure to mention the same in the show cause notice, the only stand of the revenue is that there

DAWAT E ISLAMI,RAIPUR vs. THE CIT ( EXEMPTION ) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 431/IND/2022[00]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidawat E Islami Chhttisgarh Cit(Exemption) Sanjay Nagar R D A Plot Raipur Bhopal Vs. Raipur, Chhttisgarh (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aadtd 7213 R Assessee By Shri Ankit Chowksi, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2023

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)

56 SOT 522 2.Acharya Sewa Nyas Uttaranchal v. CIT 13 SOT 54 (Delhi) 3. M.L. Nambyar Saarc Law Charitable Trust vs. Union of India 269 ITR 556 (Delhi HC) 4. N.N. Desai Charitable Trust vs. CIT 246 ITR 452 (Gujarat HC) 5. Indo-German Studies v. DIT (Ex.) Hyderabad 74 taxmann.com 66 (Hyd. Trib.) 4. On the other hand

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN,BHOPAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeal

ITA 289/IND/2020[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(1)(ab)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

2. CIT Vs Surat City Gymkhana(2008) 216 CTR 23(SC) 3. Income tax Officer, (E) 1 (1), Mumbai v. Bhansali Trust [2015] 63 taxmann.com 56 (Mumbai-Trib.) 4. Deccan Gymkhana (Oldesty Trust) v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 459/131 Taxman 279 (Bom) 6. Per contra, ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the order of Ld. CIT(E). Digamber Jain ITA No.287

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN,CHULGIRI BHOPAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeal

ITA 287/IND/2020[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(1)(ab)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

2. CIT Vs Surat City Gymkhana(2008) 216 CTR 23(SC) 3. Income tax Officer, (E) 1 (1), Mumbai v. Bhansali Trust [2015] 63 taxmann.com 56 (Mumbai-Trib.) 4. Deccan Gymkhana (Oldesty Trust) v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 459/131 Taxman 279 (Bom) 6. Per contra, ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the order of Ld. CIT(E). Digamber Jain ITA No.287

M/S INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,INDORE vs. THE DCIT, 5(1), INDORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue for A

ITA 847/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2011-12 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit- Indore Development Authority, बनाम/ (Exemption) Ida Building,7, Race Course Vs. Road, Indore Bhopal (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Years: 2012-13 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue)

Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 38Section 6

Trust and others vs. ITO (2015) 9 TMI 902 (I.T.A.T., Amr) 3. CIT vs. Jodhpur Development Authority (2016) 139 DTR (Raj.) 1 4. ACIT vs. Modipon Ltd. & Vice-versa (2015) 12 TMI 460 (I.T.A.T., Del.) Indore Development Authority ITANos.847 870 & 1355/Ind/2016 37. We, therefore, in the given facts and circumstances of the case and following the judicial precedence as well

M/S INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,INDORE vs. THE ACIT (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue for A

ITA 1355/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2011-12 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit- Indore Development Authority, बनाम/ (Exemption) Ida Building,7, Race Course Vs. Road, Indore Bhopal (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Years: 2012-13 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue)

Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 38Section 6

Trust and others vs. ITO (2015) 9 TMI 902 (I.T.A.T., Amr) 3. CIT vs. Jodhpur Development Authority (2016) 139 DTR (Raj.) 1 4. ACIT vs. Modipon Ltd. & Vice-versa (2015) 12 TMI 460 (I.T.A.T., Del.) Indore Development Authority ITANos.847 870 & 1355/Ind/2016 37. We, therefore, in the given facts and circumstances of the case and following the judicial precedence as well

THE DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL vs. M/S. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue for A

ITA 870/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2011-12 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit- Indore Development Authority, बनाम/ (Exemption) Ida Building,7, Race Course Vs. Road, Indore Bhopal (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Years: 2012-13 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue)

Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 38Section 6

Trust and others vs. ITO (2015) 9 TMI 902 (I.T.A.T., Amr) 3. CIT vs. Jodhpur Development Authority (2016) 139 DTR (Raj.) 1 4. ACIT vs. Modipon Ltd. & Vice-versa (2015) 12 TMI 460 (I.T.A.T., Del.) Indore Development Authority ITANos.847 870 & 1355/Ind/2016 37. We, therefore, in the given facts and circumstances of the case and following the judicial precedence as well

M/S RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIK VISHWAVIDHALYA,HOSANGABAD vs. DCIT CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 325/IND/2018[15-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2018

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 324 & 325/Ind/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vs. Dcit, Vishwavidyalaya, Cpc, Bhopal Bangaluru

Section 10Section 139Section 143(1)Section 35

Trust vs. ACIT (Exemption ), (2013 37 Taxman 285 ( Chennai Trib). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that had the Ld. CIT(A) considered this binding precedent, he would not have sustained the addition/adjustments made through intimation as issued by the CPC Bangalore. On the contrary the Ld. Departmental Representative supported the orders, mor e particularly, the impugned order