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.

10 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 36(1)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka468Delhi345Mumbai329Bangalore138Chennai135Jaipur89Hyderabad80Ahmedabad71Pune47Chandigarh45Indore42Kolkata39Lucknow34Cochin27Allahabad21Amritsar20Visakhapatnam16Calcutta16Cuttack16Agra14Surat12Patna10Nagpur8Rajkot7Varanasi7Telangana7Raipur6SC6Kerala5Rajasthan3Jodhpur3Punjab & Haryana2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 153A16Section 143(3)16Section 26314Addition to Income7Section 2506Section 11(1)6Section 1326Section 133A4Section 142(1)4

M/S SATYAM EDUCATIONAL HEALTH & CHARITABLE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 37/PAT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

36,700/- and why the same should not be treated as undisclosed receipt on the basis of seized documents which was replied by the assessee vide para 16 of written submissions copy of which is placed at page 217 to 220 of PB with corroborating evidences. The AO, after examining this reply and evidences filed by the assessee, framed

M/S SATYAM EDUCATIONAL HEALTH & CHARITABLE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

Exemption4
Charitable Trust4
Survey u/s 133A4

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 38/PAT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

36,700/- and why the same should not be treated as undisclosed receipt on the basis of seized documents which was replied by the assessee vide para 16 of written submissions copy of which is placed at page 217 to 220 of PB with corroborating evidences. The AO, after examining this reply and evidences filed by the assessee, framed

M/S SATYAM EDUCATIONAL HEALTH & CHARITABLE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 39/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

36,700/- and why the same should not be treated as undisclosed receipt on the basis of seized documents which was replied by the assessee vide para 16 of written submissions copy of which is placed at page 217 to 220 of PB with corroborating evidences. The AO, after examining this reply and evidences filed by the assessee, framed

M/S SATYAM EDUCATIONAL HEALTH & CHARITABLE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 36/PAT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

36,700/- and why the same should not be treated as undisclosed receipt on the basis of seized documents which was replied by the assessee vide para 16 of written submissions copy of which is placed at page 217 to 220 of PB with corroborating evidences. The AO, after examining this reply and evidences filed by the assessee, framed

KARAM AGRAMI AMAN AUR MAITRI SANSTAN,RANCHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PATNA, PATNA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 505/PAT/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Feb 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Patna For Rejection Of Registration Under Section 12Ab(1)(B)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Said Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Patna Was Passed & Received On The Same Date By Mail. Therefore, The Appeal Should Have Been Instituted Within 60 Days From Receipt Of Such Order I.E., On Or Before 04.05.2024. I.T.A. No. 505/Pat/2024 Karam Agrami Aman Aur Maitri Sanstan

Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

Section 12AB(1)(b)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The said Order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Patna was passed & received on the same date by mail. Therefore, the appeal should have been instituted within 60 days from receipt of such order i.e., on or before 04.05.2024. I.T.A. No. 505/Pat/2024 Karam Agrami Aman

M/S PARWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 45/PAT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

1. The guidance of judicial precedence laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Malabar Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC) wherein their Lordship have held that twin conditions needs to be satisfied before exercising revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act by the CIT. The twin conditions are that the order of the Assessing Officer

M/S PARWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 44/PAT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

1. The guidance of judicial precedence laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Malabar Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC) wherein their Lordship have held that twin conditions needs to be satisfied before exercising revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act by the CIT. The twin conditions are that the order of the Assessing Officer

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 65/PAT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 11(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 253(2)

iii) Hostel receipts – Rs. 1,63,86,667.00 (iv) Pharmacy receipts – Rs. 35,09,829.00 (v) Other receipts – Rs. 12,24,776.25 Furthermore, the Ld. AO found that the receipts from pharmacy exceeded the tolerance limit of 20% as per the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. It is seen that there is also a supporting finding that

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 67/PAT/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 11(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 253(2)

iii) Hostel receipts – Rs. 1,63,86,667.00 (iv) Pharmacy receipts – Rs. 35,09,829.00 (v) Other receipts – Rs. 12,24,776.25 Furthermore, the Ld. AO found that the receipts from pharmacy exceeded the tolerance limit of 20% as per the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. It is seen that there is also a supporting finding that

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 66/PAT/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 11(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 253(2)

iii) Hostel receipts – Rs. 1,63,86,667.00 (iv) Pharmacy receipts – Rs. 35,09,829.00 (v) Other receipts – Rs. 12,24,776.25 Furthermore, the Ld. AO found that the receipts from pharmacy exceeded the tolerance limit of 20% as per the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. It is seen that there is also a supporting finding that