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.

39 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 254(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka432Delhi169Mumbai162Surat95Chennai49Pune43Jaipur39Ahmedabad32Bangalore26Lucknow26Hyderabad25Calcutta18Chandigarh16Amritsar16Nagpur11Cochin9Kolkata8Rajkot8Telangana8Cuttack5SC5Raipur4Agra3Rajasthan3Varanasi3Allahabad2Jodhpur1Indore1Andhra Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 12A84Section 80G41Exemption28Section 1126Section 143(3)20Addition to Income17Disallowance13Section 80G(5)12Section 109

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)

254 ITR 212 wherein Hon’ble Apex Court held that any trust making discrimination on the basis of caste or religion, unless covered under explanation, i.e. meant for SC/ST cannot be considered charitable and thus is not eligible for registration under Section 12A. On behalf of the appellant, reliance has been placed on decisions in the case

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

Deduction8
Section 153A6
Section 36(1)(iii)6

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)

254 ITR 212 wherein Hon’ble Apex Court held that any trust making discrimination on the basis of caste or religion, unless covered under explanation, i.e. meant for SC/ST cannot be considered charitable and thus is not eligible for registration under Section 12A. On behalf of the appellant, reliance has been placed on decisions in the case

PORWAL YUVAK SANGH KOTA,KOTA vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

ITA 708/JPR/2024[2023-24 ]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024
Section 12A

1) (b) (i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in\nshort 'the Act') for A.Y. 2023-24. The assessee has raised the following grounds of\nappeal:-\n1 The Impugned order u/s. 12AB of the Act dated 30.03.2024 is bad in law\nand on facts, without providing adequate & reasonable opportunity of being\nheard, being without jurisdiction and for various other reasons

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)

254 ITR 744 (Guj) 3. CIT vs Sir M. Visveswaraya Educational Trust 319 ITR 425((Karn) 4. Nachimuthu Industrial Association Vs. CIT 235 ITR 190 5. CIT vs VGP Foundation 262 ITR 187 (Mad.) 6. S.N. Namasivaym Chettiar vs CIT 38 ITR 579 (SC) 3.3 On the other hand, the ld.AR supported the order

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

254, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed: "If the profit must necessarily feed a charitable purpose under the terms of the trust, the mere fact that the activities of the trust yield profit will not alter the charitable character of the trust. The restrictive condition that purpose should not involve the carrying on of any activity for profit would

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)

1 or sub section 2 or sub section 3 or sub section 3A shall not apply in relation to any income of a trust or an institution, being profit and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be institutions and separate Books of accounts

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)

1 or sub section 2 or sub section 3 or sub section 3A shall not apply in relation to any income of a trust or an institution, being profit and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be institutions and separate Books of accounts

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)

1 or sub section 2 or sub section 3 or sub section 3A shall not apply in relation to any income of a trust or an institution, being profit and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be institutions and separate Books of accounts

VIVEK SHIKSHA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION - 1,, JAIPUR

In the result ground no. 2 raised by the assessee stands

ITA 1134/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1134 & 1135/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Vivek Shiksha Samiti Jobner Road, Kalwar, VIA Jhotwara, Jaipur. cuke Vs. The ITO, Exemption-1, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTV0361Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Gatum Singh Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Gatum Singh Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 143(1)

trust. 3.1 ITA No. 1134/JPR/2024 relates to the assessment year 2014-15 wherein the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred seriously in dismissing the appeal in limine by not condoning the delay occurred in filing the appeal without properly appreciating the reasons stated

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E) , JAIPUR

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

ITA 1015/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

1) 42[, (1A)] and (2), an\norder of fresh assessment 43[or fresh order under section 92CA, as the case may be,] in\npursuance of an order under section 254 or section 263 or section 264, setting aside or\ncancelling an assessment, 43[or an order under section 92CA, as the case may be], may\nbe made at any time

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

section 13(1)(b) to be seen at the time of assessment for determining exemption Further the headnotes of the decision in case of Palghat Shadi Mahal Trust read as follows: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PALGHAT SHADI MAHAL TRUST (2002) 254 ITR 212 (SC) Charitable

SHRI VERDHMAN STHANAKVASI JAIN SHRISANGH,KOTA vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesseeis allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 607/JPR/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jan 2024

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (C.A.)&For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 12ASection 253(3)

Charitable 12 Shri VerdhmanSthanakvasi Jain shrisangh vs. CIT(E) sant Sthanakwai the sansthan are and religious Bhawan, carried on regular object Grand Hotel basis and expenses are gali, also made on regular Rampura, basis. We are unable Kota to specify the expenses incurred for this activity. 5. To organize the In summer Jain Average All the activities of Upliftment

M/S. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. ADD.CIT. RANGE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

ITA 284/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT) &

1 or sub section 2 or sub section 3 or sub section 3A shall not apply in relation to any income of a trust or an institution, being profit and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be institutions and separate Books of accounts

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

ITA 1355/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Dec 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT) &

1 or sub section 2 or sub section 3 or sub section 3A shall not apply in relation to any income of a trust or an institution, being profit and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be institutions and separate Books of accounts

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. M/S RAJASTHAN CRICEKT ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

ITA 1356/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Dec 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT) &

1 or sub section 2 or sub section 3 or sub section 3A shall not apply in relation to any income of a trust or an institution, being profit and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be institutions and separate Books of accounts

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

254 ITR 212 (SC)\nCharitable Trust—Exemption under s.11—Disqualification under s.\n13(1)(b)— Trust for benefit of Muslims—Trust created for educational\nsocial, economic and religious development of Muslims as recognised by\nMuslim Law- Extension of benefits to other communities impermissible—\nTrust disqualified under s.13(1)(b) from availing benefit of s.11\n\n11\nITA No. 1184 & 1185/JP/2024

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

ITA 1021/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

1) 42[, (1A)] and (2), an order of fresh assessment 43[or fresh order under section 92CA, as the case may be,] in pursuance of an order under section 254 or section 263 or section 264, setting aside or cancelling an assessment, 43[or an order under section 92CA, as the case may be], may be made at any time

BHARITAYA JAIN SANGHATANA,KOTA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

ITA 87/JPR/2024[NOT APPLICABLE ]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Sept 2024

Bench: this Appellate Tribunal. 3. Arguments heard. File perused. 4. It may be mentioned here that earlier on 07.08.2024 on behalf of the appellant, a paper book was submitted with Index depicting 21 documents. Today, fresh Index to the said paper book consisting of only 20 documents has been furnished. Copy supplied to Ld. DR for the Department.

For Appellant: Shri Sidhartha Ranka, Adv &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam (CIT)
Section 12A

254 ITR 212 wherein Hon’ble Apex Court held that any trust making discrimination on the basis of caste or religion, unless covered under explanation, i.e. meant for SC/ST cannot be considered charitable and thus is not eligible for registration under Section 12A. On behalf of the appellant, reliance has been placed on decision in the case of Umaid Charitable

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 812/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

Charitable Trust [2022] 144 taxmann.com 54 (Madras)/[2023] 450 ITR 368 (Madras) [31-10-2022] "63. The statements given to the Assessing officer under section 132 (4) have legal force. Unless the retractions are made within a short span of time, supported by affidavit swearing that the contents are incorrect and it was obtained under force, coercion and by lodging

SUKH LAL RATHI CHARITABLE TRUST ,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 1058/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Jan 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Bhanwar Singh Ratnu, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12A

CHARITABLE TRUST VS CIT (E), JAIPUR 2.3 During the course of hearing, the ld.AR of the assesee filed the following submission with the prayer to direct the ld. CIT(E) to grant registration to the assessee u/s 12AA of the Act ‘’1. Second proviso to section 153(5) provides that where an order u/s 254