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.

252 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 14clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai946Delhi930Karnataka567Chennai488Bangalore458Ahmedabad289Jaipur252Pune248Kolkata173Hyderabad166Chandigarh107Cochin94Amritsar80Indore72Rajkot69Surat67Lucknow56Visakhapatnam48Cuttack46Allahabad33Raipur32Nagpur30Telangana30Agra27Patna24Jodhpur22Calcutta19SC14Kerala9Dehradun9Guwahati8Varanasi7Rajasthan7Punjab & Haryana6Ranchi6Panaji5Jabalpur4Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh2Orissa2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 12A235Exemption74Section 80G61Section 1156Section 26343Addition to Income37Section 143(3)36Section 1031Section 13(3)23

ALL INDIA SECURITISATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ASSOCIATION,CHITRANJAN MARG vs. CIT EXEMPTION, KAILASH HEIGHT,

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 627/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Apr 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Rajvanshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

section 12A sub\nsection (1) clause (ac) sub clause (iii) but was wrongly rejected by CIT(E) Exemption.\n\nThe assessee Trust was issued a letter/notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/2023-24/1060767226(1) dated\n11/02/2024 requesting it to furnish certain documents/explanations by 14/02/2024. The assessee trust\nsubmitted reply with complete documents/explanations on 14-02-2024 vide PB No.107-120. Further\nassessee was issued a show

MANDIR SHREE BHAIRAV JI TRUST,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Showing 1–20 of 252 · Page 1 of 13

...
Section 2(15)22
Condonation of Delay20
Limitation/Time-bar13

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

ITA 427/JPR/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Nov 2023

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vikash Rajvanshi (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

section or sex in India not dedicated to only one religion or caste. Hence, our trust is charitable trust eligible for registration u/s 80G(5) Also in similar Decision of ITAT ‘CUTTACK’ BENCH vide I.T.A. No. 270/CTK/ 2014 in case of Shree Ram Mandir Seva Samiti, Vs. CIT Bhubaneswar Trust was considered as charitable trust eligible for registration fulfilling conditions

BHARATPUR ROYAL FAMILY RELIGIOUS & CEREMONIAL TRUST,BHARATPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

In the result, we upheld the order of the ld PCIT in exercise of his powers u/s 263 in setting aside the order so passed by the AO and the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 290/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Jul 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Rajendra Singh (CIT)
Section 10Section 12ASection 154Section 24Section 263Section 297

charitable purposes as so contained in section 4(3)(i) of Act of 1922. Unlike provisions contained in section 4(3)(i) of the Act of 1922, the provisions of section 11(1)(a)/(b) of the Act of 1961 are subject to satisfaction of various conditions relating to application, accumulation, manner of investment, etc, and more importantly, registration with

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 57/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anish Maheshwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl.CIT
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 164(2)

Trust. That the Ld. CIT(A) also erred in not allowing the depreciation & did different interpretation which is not based on earlier order of Higher Authorities. 6. That the Ld. A.O. grossly erred in charging tax on Charitable expenditure i.e. Food for hunger Rs. 3,52,338.00. The Ld. CIT(A) also erred in not considering the ground

VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 696/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ab)Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(ii)Section 80G(5)(iii)

section 80G(5) was applicable only to newly constructed trust and not to old trust, delay in filing Form No.10AB deserved to be condoned. 7. Otherwise also, CBDT vide Circular No.7/2024 dt. 25.04.2024 has extended the time for filing the application for permanent approval till 30.06.2024 whereas in earlier Circular No.6/2023 dt. 24.05.2023 the time for filing application for permanent

VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 695/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ab)Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(ii)Section 80G(5)(iii)

section 80G(5) was applicable only to newly constructed trust and not to old trust, delay in filing Form No.10AB deserved to be condoned. 7. Otherwise also, CBDT vide Circular No.7/2024 dt. 25.04.2024 has extended the time for filing the application for permanent approval till 30.06.2024 whereas in earlier Circular No.6/2023 dt. 24.05.2023 the time for filing application for permanent

SHRI MERH KSHTRIYA SABHA,AJMER vs. CIT(APPEALS), DELHI

ITA 632/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 May 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 11(1)Section 115BSection 12ASection 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80G

14 dated 28.12.2006 and circular no. 5 dated\n03.06.2010 your attention on clause 25.2 is solicited which states \"With a view to\nprevent channelization of unaccounted money to these institutions by way of\nanonymous donations, a new section 115BBC has been inserted to provide that any\nincome of a wholly charitable trust

BHIWADI INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,BHIWADI, ALWAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

ITA 595/JPR/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jan 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal (C.A.)&For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 9

charitable or religious purposes and the provisions of that section and Section 13 shall apply accordingly. 12. Section 13, a non obstante clause provides that the provisions of Section 11 or Section 12 shall not operate as to exclude from total income of the previous years of the person in respect of various income enumerated under clauses

SHRI SUKH LAL RATHI CHARITABLE TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

ITA 504/JPR/2018[0]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2019
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (JCIT)
Section 11Section 12A

Charitable Trust Vs. CIT(E) Section 12 AA of the Act afresh in accordance with law and on merits and to consider the genuineness of the trust / institution / genuineness of the activities of the trust after giving an opportunity to the trust to make submissions and / or produce on record any material in respect of their case that there

SUNRISE SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,SIKAR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1321/JPR/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: The Time Of Hearing.” 2. The Hearing Of The Appeal Was Concluded Through Video Conference In View Of The Prevailing Situation Of Covid-19 Pandemic.

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Choudhary (Adv)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 3

trust did not produce the books of account, bills and vouchers etc. for verification of the ld. CIT for which the ld. CIT held that the assessee society is not carrying out any charitable activities. Due to noncompliance of assessee society, the genuineness of the activities could not be verified. The ld. CIT, therefore, relying on various decisions including

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 66/JPR/2022[2005]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

14. On perusal of the assessment order, it is noted that the prime reason for denial of exemption under section 11 of the Act by the Assessing officer is systematic generation of surplus year after year under various heads of income by the assessee society. As per Assessing officer, the systematic generation of surplus year after year establishes that various

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 67/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

14. On perusal of the assessment order, it is noted that the prime reason for denial of exemption under section 11 of the Act by the Assessing officer is systematic generation of surplus year after year under various heads of income by the assessee society. As per Assessing officer, the systematic generation of surplus year after year establishes that various

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 68/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

14. On perusal of the assessment order, it is noted that the prime reason for denial of exemption under section 11 of the Act by the Assessing officer is systematic generation of surplus year after year under various heads of income by the assessee society. As per Assessing officer, the systematic generation of surplus year after year establishes that various

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

ITA 621/JPR/2023[2017-18 onwards]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2024
For Appellant: Sh. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik, CIT &
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 40A(3)

trust. There is no finding in the order that the activities\nof the trust are not as per the trust deed which warrants rejection of the registration.\nThe apex court has allowed that the if the activities are done at reasonable profit\nrate the same cannot violate the provision of section 11 & 12 of the Act. The\nregistration

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST (NOW KOTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 811/JPR/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

charitable objects of the Appellant Trust. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing various expenditure incurred

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE , JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 717/JPR/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

charitable objects of the Appellant Trust. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing various expenditure incurred

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

ITA 962/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016
For Respondent: \nMrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

14. In our opinion,\nthese observations have to be understood in the light of the facts before the\nSupreme Court in the case of Thanthi Trust (supra), wherein the trust carried\non the business of a newspaper and that business itself was held under trust.\nThe charitable object of the trust was the imparting of education which falls\nu/s.2

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST,KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable\nunder the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions\nmade, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 774/JPR/2024[AY 2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025
Section 250

charitable objects of the Appellant Trust.\n5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred\nin not allowing the allowing the depreciation alternatively claimed by the Appellant.\n6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred\nin not allowing various expenditure incurred

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 961/JPR/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015
For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

14. In our opinion,\nthese observations have to be understood in the light of the facts before the\nSupreme Court in the case of Thanthi Trust (supra), wherein the trust carried\non the business of a newspaper and that business itself was held under trust.\nThe charitable object of the trust was the imparting of education which falls\nu/s

SHRI PARNAMI PANCHAYAT,JAIPUR vs. ITO, (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev sogani (C.A) &For Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 11Section 12ASection 234B

14 Shri Parnami Panchayat in this case was passed by Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench, on 13/03/2020 the judgment of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Shreee Shyam Mandir Committee (Supra) was not brought to the notice of Hon'ble ITAT and, therefore, it was not considered by Hon'ble ITAT. c) This ITAT decision can have