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.

67 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 144clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka457Delhi159Chennai88Mumbai80Bangalore70Jaipur67Ahmedabad39Pune38Hyderabad31Chandigarh29Lucknow26Allahabad21Kolkata19Amritsar17Calcutta16Indore10Rajkot9Visakhapatnam6Raipur6Nagpur5Agra4Surat3Telangana3Rajasthan2Jodhpur2Cuttack2Patna2Cochin2Andhra Pradesh1Ranchi1SC1Dehradun1Guwahati1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 26363Section 12A61Addition to Income40Exemption31Section 1128Section 143(3)28Section 153C27Section 14719Section 14419Section 115B

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

trust\n11.\nForm 10AC under Sub clause (i) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A 20-22\nvide Unique Registration Number AAITA7176ME2021201\n12.\nForm 10A under sub clause (1) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A 23-26\nvide acknowledgement no. 586198510270921\n13.\nForm 10AB under sub clause (iii) of clause

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

Showing 1–20 of 67 · Page 1 of 4

17
Condonation of Delay15
Deduction11
ITA 159/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2025AY 2025-26
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.A
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

144-147) along with a comparison chart\nof price charged by assessee trust and other similar institution (APB 82)was furnished\nbefore ld. CIT(E). It is further submitted that the comparison chart prepared by the\nassessee trust was made after visiting other similar various institutions. Thus, had the ld.\nCIT(E) had doubts about the prices charged

ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

ITA 158/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2025AY 2025-26
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.A
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

144-147) along with a comparison chart\nof price charged by assessee trust and other similar institution (APB 82)was furnished\nbefore ld. CIT(E). It is further submitted that the comparison chart prepared by the\nassessee trust was made after visiting other similar various institutions. Thus, had the ld.\nCIT(E) had doubts about the prices charged

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

ITA 201/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)Section 145(3)

charitable educational institution. This case is not applicable as in the present case advance has been given to the Societies having similar objects and the amount has also been received back. In view of the above, the order of CIT(A) be upheld by dismissing the grounds of the department. ‘’ 4.1.4 We have heard both the parties and perused

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN ATIKSHAYA KESHTRA,PADAMPUA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1, KAILASH HEIGHTS

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 424/JPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 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 11(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 24Section 253(3)

trust. Depreciation claimed by the assessee was not in respect of any assets which was used for business purpose but was admittedly used for assessee's charitable activities. Hence, section 32 is not applicable here because the assessee was not carrying of any business activity, nor the depreciation claimed in respect of any asset which was used for business purposes

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMPTIONS,CIRCLE,JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 175/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, (Addl.CIT)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147

144 (SC) (vii) CIT vs. Balbir Singh Mani (2017) 398 ITR 531 (SC)" (B) CONCLUSION: - In view of the aforesaid submission and the facts of the case it is submitted that the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in making the addition without appreciating the provisions of section 13(3) and similarly the Learned CIT(A) has erroneously confirmed the additions

AKHIL BHARATVARSHIYA PAPEEK ASHRAM TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

ITA 1185/JPR/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 May 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhilesh Kataria, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

Charitable activities carried out for the entire society and not just for pareek samaj: There is incorrect observation of the ld. CIT that the trust is working only for Pareek samaj which is apparently incorrect and contrary to the information and evidences brought on record by the assessee. ITA No. 1184 & 1185/JP/2024 Akhil Bharatvarshiya Papeek Ashram Trust Akhil Bharatvarshiya Papeek

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 665/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2013-14 Jodhpur Development Authority 1, Opposite Railway Hospital, JDA Circle, Jodhpur. cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jodhpur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALJ 0478 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by:

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 234A

charitable trust. 11. The interest charged u/s 234A, 234B and 2340 is bad in law and bad on facts. 12. The appellant crave liberty to add, amend, alter, modify, or delete any of the ground of appeal on or before its hearing before your honour.” 3.1 At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 666/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 234A

charitable trust. 11. The interest charged u/s 234A, 234B and 2340 is bad in law and bad on facts. 12. The appellant crave liberty to add, amend, alter, modify, or delete any of the ground of appeal on or before its hearing before your honour.” 3.1 At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay

RAJASTHAN STATE BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HOLDING CHARGE OF ITO EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 381/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 11(5)

Trust for the Assessment Year 2010-11 was completed under Section 147 r.ws 144. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), Jaipur, which was disposed of as per the details below: S.N. Assessment Date of AO Date of CIT(A) year order Order

RAJASTHAN STATE BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE,JAIPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 382/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 11(5)

Trust for the Assessment Year 2010-11 was completed under Section 147 r.ws 144. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), Jaipur, which was disposed of as per the details below: S.N. Assessment Date of AO Date of CIT(A) year order Order

AKHIL BHARATVARSHIYA PAPEEK ASHRAM TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

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

ITA 1184/JPR/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 May 2025AY 2024-25
For Appellant: Sh. Nikhilesh Kataria, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

section 12A. This application was rejected for three reasons\nas would appear from the last page of the order passed by the Id. CIT\n(Exemption) (herein after referred to as the CIT) precisely on the following three\ngrounds:\na. Discrepancy in dissolution clause-trust is revocable\nb. Object for the benefit of the particular community\nc. Non genuineness

PALAS GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,SIKAR vs. ITO, SIKAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1017/JPR/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Oct 2025AY 2020-2021
For Appellant: Sh. Jitendra Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gajendra Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 250Section 253(5)Section 80A(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

144 and the appellate order\nunder Section 250 were passed without due consideration of the material\navailable on record, and without giving effect to the legal mandate that\ndeductions under Chapter VI-A, including Section 80P, must be restricted to the\nextent of GTI. Both authorities erred in treating the claimed deduction as\nunsubstantiated when, in fact, the deduction

DIGAMBER JAIN MANDIR SHRI NEMINATH JI SANWALAJI AMER,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 336/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Mathur,CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

144 (3) & 143(3) of the Income Tax Act [ here in after as Act ] , by ITO (Exemption), Ward -1, Jaipur. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure disputed / added in each year. Therefore, these appeals were heard together with the agreement of both the parties

DIGAMBER JAIN MANDIR SHRI NEMINATH JI SANWALA JI AMER,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 337/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Mathur,CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

144 (3) & 143(3) of the Income Tax Act [ here in after as Act ] , by ITO (Exemption), Ward -1, Jaipur. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure disputed / added in each year. Therefore, these appeals were heard together with the agreement of both the parties

DIGAMBER JAIN MANDIR SHRI NEMINATH JI SANWALAJI AMER,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 335/JPR/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Mathur,CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

144 (3) & 143(3) of the Income Tax Act [ here in after as Act ] , by ITO (Exemption), Ward -1, Jaipur. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure disputed / added in each year. Therefore, these appeals were heard together with the agreement of both the parties

DIGAMBER JAIN MANDIR SHRI NEMINATH JI SANWALAJI AMER,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 334/JPR/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Mathur,CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT

144 (3) & 143(3) of the Income Tax Act [ here in after as Act ] , by ITO (Exemption), Ward -1, Jaipur. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure disputed / added in each year. Therefore, these appeals were heard together with the agreement of both the parties

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 39/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 234

charitable activities u/s 2(15),\nit was granted registration u/s 12A - whether, the filing of audit report alongwith\nthe return filed in response to notice u/s 148 will entitle the assessee for benefit\nof computation of section 11 ? - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that, whether it\nis a case of a regular assessment or it is a case

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 41/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 234

charitable activities u/s 2(15),\nit was granted registration u/s 12A - whether, the filing of audit report alongwith\nthe return filed in response to notice u/s 148 will entitle the assessee for benefit\nof computation of section 11 ? - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that, whether it\nis a case of a regular assessment or it is a case

SAKSHAM SAMAJIK UTTHAN AVEM VIKAS SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

ITA 760/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

Trust Act, 1959, dated 10/11/2023, with registration No. 111 JAIPUR, 2023. The society is engaged in running charitable activities. It operated a primary school named Deep Public School until the academic year 2021-22, after which the school was closed. Currently, the society is running a Beggars Rehabilitation Home at Old Nigam Bhawan, Stadium Road, Sanganer, Jaipur and other charitable