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.

26 results for “disallowance”+ Section 12A(1)(ac)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi37Calcutta34Kolkata29Mumbai26Bangalore16Jaipur13Chennai11Pune10Ahmedabad9Raipur9Indore5Varanasi4Hyderabad4Agra3Guwahati2Lucknow2SC2Surat2Chandigarh1Punjab & Haryana1Amritsar1Telangana1Dehradun1Jodhpur1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 1157Section 12A55Exemption21Section 11(1)(c)18Section 14716Charitable Trust16Section 80G12Section 14812Section 133A12Section 263

JEEVANDEEP EDUMEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE CIT-6, MUMBAI

In the result, the a In the result, the appeal of the assessee is stands allowed

ITA 2517/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2020-21 Jeevandeep Edumedia Pvt. Ltd., Pr. Cit-6, 1St Floor, Sun Paradise Business 501,5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Plaza, Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Maharishi Karve Road, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aabcj 0180 G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Parikh
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

1. The learned PCIT erred in facts and in law by disallowing the deduction of Rs.12,49,000/ deduction of Rs.12,49,000/- under section 80G of the IT Act. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

12
Addition to Income11
Disallowance10

JINSEVA FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appe

ITA 3531/MUM/2025[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2025-2026

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

For Appellant: Mr. Margav Shukla
Section 11Section 12A

disallowance of exemption u/s. mption u/s. 11 of the Act and cannot be a ground Act and cannot be a ground for rejection of registration u/s. 12A. for rejection of registration u/s. 12A. Ground - 4 4 - Without prejudice to the above, out of abundant Without prejudice to the above, out of abundant precaution and in good faith, the appellant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ALL INDIA GEM AND JEWELLERY DOMESTIC COUNCIL, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4652/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Respondent: Mr. Firoz Andhyarujina
Section 11Section 2(15)

ac large. Thus, it is not a charitable organization and its activities are in tivities are in the nature of business activities, hit by the 1st proviso to section 2(15) of the nature of business activities, hit by the 1st proviso to section 2(15) of the nature of business activities, hit by the 1st proviso to section

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. TATA EDUCATION AND DEVEOPMENT TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1535/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2020AY 2012-13
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12A

12A(1)(ac). A reference is then made to proviso to Section 80HHD(4) which provides that so far as any utilization of reserve which would result in creation of any asset owned by the assessee outside India, “such asset should be created only after obtaining prior approval of the prescribed authority”. It is then again pointed out that

TATA EDUCATION AND DEVEOPMENT TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(EXP)-2(1) NOW ASSESSED BY DCIT (EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1424/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2020AY 2012-13
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12A

12A(1)(ac). A reference is then made to proviso to Section 80HHD(4) which provides that so far as any utilization of reserve which would result in creation of any asset owned by the assessee outside India, “such asset should be created only after obtaining prior approval of the prescribed authority”. It is then again pointed out that

TATA EDUCATION AND DEVEOPMENT TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(EXP)-2(1) NOW ASSESSED BY DCIT (EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1423/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2020AY 2011-12
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12A

12A(1)(ac). A reference is then made to proviso to Section 80HHD(4) which provides that so far as any utilization of reserve which would result in creation of any asset owned by the assessee outside India, “such asset should be created only after obtaining prior approval of the prescribed authority”. It is then again pointed out that

ADITYA BIRLA EDUCATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 4474/MUM/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Soparkar (virtually appear), Shri Yogesh Thar, ShriFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT-DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(b)

ac)(i) of the Act are restored. In the result, grounds of appeal Nos. 2 to 22 taken by the assessee are allowed.” 21 Aditya Birla Education Trust b. Proposition 2: Violation of s. 13(1)(b) cannot be the basis for denial of approval/registration u/s. 12AB of the assessee's modified objects. Gohilwad Vankar Samaj Seva Trust

SHAMKRIS CHARITY FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION , MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3394/MUM/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadangms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. AR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 8

ac) of sub- section (1) of section 12A 2. It has been noted that at times trusts or institutions are unable to file application within specified timelines. In case a trust or institution is unable to apply within time specified, it may become liable to tax on accreted income as per provisions of Chapter

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ADDL DIT (E) RG 1, MUMBAI

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7108/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– 1(1) 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent) Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– Range 1 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(e)Section 25

12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") vide certificate dated 7th June 1994 and claims benefit under section 11 of the Act. Ground 1: Denial of benefit of section 11 by invoking section 13 4. During the previous year ended 31st March 2007, the assessee entered into an agreement with Hansa Research Group Pvt. Ltd. ("HRG") (Page

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (E) 1(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6459/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– 1(1) 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent) Media Research Users Council V. Addl. Dit(E)– Range 1 128, Tv Industrial Estate Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaatm5433F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(e)Section 25

12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") vide certificate dated 7th June 1994 and claims benefit under section 11 of the Act. Ground 1: Denial of benefit of section 11 by invoking section 13 4. During the previous year ended 31st March 2007, the assessee entered into an agreement with Hansa Research Group Pvt. Ltd. ("HRG") (Page

JINSEVA FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

ITA 3532/MUM/2025[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2025-2026
Section 11Section 12ASection 8

disallowance of exemption u/s.11 of the\nAct and cannot be a ground for rejection of registration u/s.12A.\nGround - 4 - Without prejudice to the above, out of abundant\nprecaution and in good faith, the appellant is in the process of\nundertaking necessary amendments to the object clause of\nmemorandum of association to address the concerns raised by the\nHon. CIT (Exemptions

ST. THOMAS CHURCH,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

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

ITA 296/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 296/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) St Thomas Church V/S. Income Tax Officer 1, Church Road, बिाम (Exemptions) Ward 2(4), Goregaon (East), Mumbai Mumbai 400063 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai 400026. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt4878R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Ms. Vasanti Patel-Adv राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel-AdvFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250

12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Income Tax Act vide certificate dated 23.09.2021 valid for A.Ys 2022-23 to 2026-27. The assessee filed return declaring income of Rs. 54,392/- for AY 2022-23 on 07.11.2022. The Centralised Processing Centre, Bangalore (CPC) issued intimation u/s. 143(1) dated 19.07.2023 making addition by disallowing the entire amount of Rs. 1

THE UNITED WORLD COLLEGE COMMITTEE (INDIA),MUMBAI vs. ACIT EXEM. CIRCLE 2 MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is a In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 522/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2016-17 The United World College Committee Acit Exem., Circle 2, (India), Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug, Vs. Ground Floor, Mahindra Towers, Parel, Worli, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400018. Pan No. Aaatt 3774 C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. R D Onkar/Viksit Bhargava
Section 11(2)Section 143(3)

1), read with the Explanation to that sub-section, which is not applied, but is accumulated or set apart, to section, which is not applied, but is accumulated or set apart, to section, which is not applied, but is accumulated or set apart, to any trust or institution registered under section 12AA or to any fund or or institution registered

SUPARIWALA EXPORT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2039/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2021AY 2014-15
Section 133ASection 35Section 35(1)(ii)

AC (total of Rs. 23 crores) under the head Administrative, Selling, Distribution & Other 2 Sopariwala Exports Pvt. Ltd. expenses and on which deduction has been claimed u/s. 35(l)(ii) of the Act @ 175%. He noted that the payment was made to an institute by the name School of Human Genetics and Population Health (SHGPH), Kolkata. That a Survey action

MR. SAURABH ANIL GANDHI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 42(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 8437/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailmr. Saurabh Anil Gandhi A-502 Chanakya Chs Ltd. Mahavir Nagar, Opp. Ekta Nagar, New Link Road, Kandivali West, Mumbai- 400067 ............... Appellant Pan: Aelpg7302J

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari a/wFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 35Section 80Section 80G

AC of the Act, and all the donations received in cheque were returned in cash to all the donors after deducting normal commission, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 28/03/2016. Accordingly, the proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated. In response to the notice, the assessee requested to treat the return

BAB-E-REHMAT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUMBRA THANE vs. AO EXEMTION WARD THANE, QUERESHI MANSION

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3119/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Bab-E-Rehmat Educational Society Ao Exemption Ward Thane Fakir Shah Baba Hill Road, Near Darul Falah, Near Sahil Hotel, Kausa, Vs. Mumbai – 400612. Pan/Gir No. Aabtb7190H (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Himanshu Gandhi Respondent By : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Ar. Date Of Hearing : 23.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Addl/Jcit (A)-2, Bengaluru (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2023-24. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1) Rejection Of Approval Claimed U/S 12Aa Is Bad In Law Assessee Having Exemption Certificate U/S 12Aa Dated 25 April 2016, As Per Old Registration Process Once An Organization Obtains Section 12Aa Registration, The Validity Of The Registration Is Perpetual Unless It Is Cancelled Or Revoked By The Income Tax Department. Unlike Certain Registrations Requiring Periodic Renewal, Section 12Aa Of Income Tax Act Has No Expiration Date Or A Specific Time Limit. Which Is Valid For Life Time Of Society/Trust That Means Appellant Is Eligible For 12Aa Registration Till Cancellation Or Revoked By The Income Tax Department. Bad-E-Rehmat Educational Society

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, SR. AR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 250

disallowed. Annadaneshwara Charitable Trust v. Income-lax Officer [2023] (Bangalore - Trib.) It was held that in the absence of the registration under the relevant sections, there cannot be any application of income. However, the gross receipts cannot be taxed in the hands of the assessee trust. The income earned by the assessee and expenditure relatable to the earning of such

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) - THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 374/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

disallowing inflated expenses. 12. Both the above grounds being related and consequential to the issue of registration are adjudicated together as the facts are intertwined basically based on the findings during survey operation. 13. It is noticed that the ld.CIT(A) has duly deliberated on the issue at length in the appellate order. He observed that during the survey

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1 THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 379/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

disallowing inflated expenses. 12. Both the above grounds being related and consequential to the issue of registration are adjudicated together as the facts are intertwined basically based on the findings during survey operation. 13. It is noticed that the ld.CIT(A) has duly deliberated on the issue at length in the appellate order. He observed that during the survey

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) - THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 377/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

disallowing inflated expenses. 12. Both the above grounds being related and consequential to the issue of registration are adjudicated together as the facts are intertwined basically based on the findings during survey operation. 13. It is noticed that the ld.CIT(A) has duly deliberated on the issue at length in the appellate order. He observed that during the survey

MUMBRA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), THANE, DY. CIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE) - 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 378/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S. Athavale,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 133ASection 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

disallowing inflated expenses. 12. Both the above grounds being related and consequential to the issue of registration are adjudicated together as the facts are intertwined basically based on the findings during survey operation. 13. It is noticed that the ld.CIT(A) has duly deliberated on the issue at length in the appellate order. He observed that during the survey