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.

8 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 54clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka457Delhi381Mumbai292Chennai132Bangalore126Ahmedabad90Jaipur88Hyderabad83Pune76Chandigarh55Kolkata42Lucknow39Cochin30Amritsar26Indore25Visakhapatnam22Cuttack19Calcutta17Allahabad13Agra12Telangana10Surat8Nagpur8Rajkot7Jodhpur6Kerala5SC5Varanasi4Rajasthan4Punjab & Haryana2Raipur1Dehradun1Patna1Orissa1Guwahati1Jabalpur1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 26318Section 1018Section 14712Section 118Section 86Section 12A6Section 13(1)(c)6Section 2(15)5Exemption5Limitation/Time-bar

LOKMANYA TILAD JANAKALYA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 384/NAG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 1Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 40

54,799 Dushyant Chaturvedi Rs. 9,05,350 The brief financial data of the trust's performance is as under : Gross Receipts 41.63 crores Net Profit 1.70 crores 4.08% Revenue Expenditure on object of Trust 39.93 crores 95.91% Capital Expenditure on Object of Trust. 8.63 crores. --------------- 48.56 crores. It is further noted that in the past as well as subsequent

3
Revision u/s 2633
Reassessment2

A,C.I.T. (EXEMPTION), NAGPUR vs. M/S VIDARBHA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 500/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri Gitesh Kumar, Senior DRFor Respondent: Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

charitable trust under Section 12A prior to 2010 would not make the amendment retrospective in operation. The amendment does not take away any vested right nor does it create new obligations in respect of past actions." 9. Hon’ble Madras High Court also held that the volume of receipt cannot be a factor for deciding the nature of activity whether

VASUNDHARA BAHUUDESHIYA SAMAJIKK SANSTHA,KHAMGAON vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 55/NAG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vasundhara Bahuudeshiya Vs. C.I.T.(Exemptions) Samajik Sanstha, Pune At Nagpur. 1, Vasundhara, Madhav Nagar, Khamgaon-444303. Pan No.: Aaabv 0305 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal (Ca) Revenue By : Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 27/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. C.I.T.(Exemptions), Pune At Nagpur Dated 23/03/2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2015-16 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assesee. “1. Whether The Revision Order Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit By Taking A Recourse To Section 263 Is Illegal & Bad In Law, When The A.O. Has Made Sufficient Enquiries During The Assessment Procedure. 2. Whether The Revision Order Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Without Considering Appellant’S Submission Is Illegal & Bad In Law. 3. Whether The Revision Order Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit Even Though If It Is Termed As Erroneous But It Is Not Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. As The Donation Has Been Duly Disclosed By The Appellant In Their

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 253(5)Section 263

charitable trust, duly registered under section 12A of the Act. The assessee trust received donation of Rs 1,23,29,000/- from 725 persons and the assessee submitted details of the doners, with their names and addresses. The A.O. issued 145 notices to the 20% of the donors to verify the veracity of the donations. Out of 145 donors

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

ITA 349/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)

Charitable Trust and has made payment of Rs. 15,33,33,000/-, the source of payment is not explained viz a viz income shown in the ITR for previous years. Therefore, income for A.Y. 2016-17 has escaped assessment. In the view of the above, I have reasons to believe that the income to the tune of Rs.15

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

ITA 350/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)

Charitable Trust and has made payment of Rs. 15,33,33,000/-, the source of payment is not explained viz a viz income shown in the ITR for previous years. Therefore, income for A.Y. 2016-17 has escaped assessment. In the view of the above, I have reasons to believe that the income to the tune of Rs.15

G. H. R. EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NAGPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

ITA 538/NAG/2024[0]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10Section 366Section 8Section 80G

charitable organizations set up for advancement of objects of general public utility are entirely different from charities set up or established for the object of imparting education. In the case of the latter, the basis of exemption is Section 10(23C) (iiiab), (iiiad) and (vi). In all these provisions, the positive condition 'solely for educational purposes and the negative injunction

G.H.R. EDUCATION FOUNDATION,NAGPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

ITA 615/NAG/2024[--]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10Section 366Section 8Section 80G

charitable organizations set up for advancement of objects of general public utility are entirely different from charities set up or established for the object of imparting education. In the case of the latter, the basis of exemption is Section 10(23C) (iiiab), (iiiad) and (vi). In all these provisions, the positive condition 'solely for educational purposes and the negative injunction

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 204/NAG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur Pan No.:Aanpg 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal By Revenue Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur Dated 30/03/2017 In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 4/198/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 68Section 69C

54 to draw support for the conclusion that the transaction in respect to long term capital gain on sale of shares made by appellant is bogus. A.O. has thus finally concluded that sale proceeds of shares is liable to be assessed as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of Income Tax Act 1961. The A.O. accordingly has made addition of Rs.5