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.

160 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 25clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi725Mumbai693Karnataka481Chennai435Bangalore332Ahmedabad207Jaipur204Pune160Kolkata157Hyderabad112Chandigarh97Cochin78Lucknow64Amritsar50Indore48Cuttack42Rajkot39Allahabad31Visakhapatnam31Nagpur30Surat27Agra23Telangana20Calcutta17Raipur17SC15Patna12Jodhpur12Kerala7Rajasthan6Dehradun6Varanasi6Punjab & Haryana5Panaji3Jabalpur3Andhra Pradesh2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Ranchi1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 12A167Section 234E108Section 1188Exemption61Section 132(4)56Charitable Trust55Section 200(3)54Section 80G(5)52Section 80G44Section 143(1)

SHRI MUKUND BHAVAN TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT(E), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1552/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrashri Mukund Bhavan Trust Cit (Exemption), Pune 1105, Raviwar Peth, Mukund Vs. Bhavan, Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaats5170R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V.L. Jain Department By : Shri Mallikarjun Utture, Cit Date Of Hearing : 05-02-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Mallikarjun Utture, CIT
Section 12ASection 13(1)(a)

section 80G(5)(v) read as under: “80G(1)…. …. (5)….. (i)….. ……. 25 (v) the institution or fund is either constituted as a public charitable trust

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 160 · Page 1 of 8

...
38
Addition to Income34
TDS25
ITA 621/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T.B. Vijaya Reddy and Shri Mukesh Jha, CIT-DRsFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Abhyankar
Section 10(21)Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 2(24)(iia)Section 35(1)(ii)

section 56(2) of the Act which governs the taxing of certain gifts despite its capital nature. 20. We have perused the said decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Chandraprabhu Jain Swetamber Mandir Vs. ACIT (2017) 82 taxmann.com 245 (Mumbai-Trib.). It is also a case of unregistered trust u/s.12A/12AA of the Act. The question

SETH RAMDAS NATHUBHAI DHARMADAYA VISHWASTA NIDHI,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,(EXEMPTIONS) -1,, PUNE

ITA 928/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Seth Ramdas Nathubhai Dharmadaya Vs. Ito Vishwasta Nidhi, (Exemptions)-1, C/O. Shah Khandelwal Jain & Pune Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, Near Rto, Pune 411 001 Pan : Aaatr6805N Appellant Respondent

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(2)Section 13(2)(c)

charitable objects of the trust. Accordingly, the ld. 25 Seth Ramdas Nathubhai Dharmadaya Vishwasta Nidhi CIT(A) upheld the denial of exemption u/s.11 for violation of section

AIDS SOCIETY OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE

ITA 417/PUN/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2025
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 12A

section 12AB).\nChandigarh Education Society (Flag- 10) + Shridevi Charitable Trust(Flag- 25) cases given in Case-Law compilation\nConclusion - As per various

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Trust claiming the said exemption which was well beyond the prescribed time limit provided for by the provisions of the Act. In such a scenario, the Assessing Officer was correct in rejecting the claim of the assessee. 25. Referring to the decision of a Three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Trust claiming the said exemption which was well beyond the prescribed time limit provided for by the provisions of the Act. In such a scenario, the Assessing Officer was correct in rejecting the claim of the assessee. 25. Referring to the decision of a Three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Trust claiming the said exemption which was well beyond the prescribed time limit provided for by the provisions of the Act. In such a scenario, the Assessing Officer was correct in rejecting the claim of the assessee. 25. Referring to the decision of a Three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Trust claiming the said exemption which was well beyond the prescribed time limit provided for by the provisions of the Act. In such a scenario, the Assessing Officer was correct in rejecting the claim of the assessee. 25. Referring to the decision of a Three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Trust claiming the said exemption which was well beyond the prescribed time limit provided for by the provisions of the Act. In such a scenario, the Assessing Officer was correct in rejecting the claim of the assessee. 25. Referring to the decision of a Three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Trust claiming the said exemption which was well beyond the prescribed time limit provided for by the provisions of the Act. In such a scenario, the Assessing Officer was correct in rejecting the claim of the assessee. 25. Referring to the decision of a Three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur

ASSISTANT OINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. PYC HINDU GYMKHANA,, PUNE

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

ITA 187/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri "याियक सद"य के सम" D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.179/Pun/2015 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Pathak
Section 11Section 2(15)

charitable trust and the proviso to section 2(15) is not applicable in this case and thus, the above deduction u/s. 11 are to be allowed.” From the above extract, the assessee is of the opinion that, so long as the assessee is entitled to claim exemption u/s.11 of the Act and the proviso to section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. MUKUND BHAVAN TRUST,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 374/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act. 2 ITA No.374/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2012-13 4. Brief facts relating to the issue on hand are that the assessee is a public charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act vide order dated 25

AGRA OBSTETRICAL AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,AGRA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PUNE

ITA 549/PUN/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2025AY 2022-23
Section 12A

Section 12A of the\nAct and, if so, under which provision of the Act?\n18. Second, when the CIT grants registration certificate under Section\n12A of the Act to the assessee, whether grant of certificate is his quasi\njudicial function and, if so, its effect on exercise of his power of\ncancellation of such grant of registration certificate?\n19. Third

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, NEAR HOLY CROSS ENGLISH SCHOOL vs. THE NANDED SIKHGURUDWARA SACHKHAND HAZUR SAHIB, ABCHALNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 809/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 10Section 139Section 143(2)

Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 (Central Act XIV of 1920) and the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The respondent-assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 declaring Rs. Nil income after claiming exemption of income under the provisions of section 10(230)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) Against the said

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, NEAR HOLY CROSS ENGLISH SCHOOL vs. THE NANDED SIKHGURUDWARA SACHKHAND HAZUR SAHIB, APCHALNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 808/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 10Section 139Section 143(2)

Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 (Central Act XIV of 1920) and the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The respondent-assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 declaring Rs. Nil income after claiming exemption of income under the provisions of section 10(230)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) Against the said

AUDYOGIK NIDHI VISHWAST SANSTHA POONA,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PMT BUILDING

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2135/PUN/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraaudyogik Nidhi Vishwast Sanstha The Cit (Exemption), Poona Pune 366, Narayan Peth, Limaye Vs. Building, Laxmi Road, Pune – 411030 Pan: Aaata1619H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05-02-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

section 12AA. 24. Since in the instant case the objects of the assessee trust have not been held to be non-charitable in nature and since a perusal of the Balance Sheet of the assessee trust shows that the assessee is not carrying out any commercial activity and since due to insufficient funds available at its disposal, the assessee

M.M. PATEL PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,SOLAPUR vs. PCIT- CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1130/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2025
Section 12Section 127Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

25 of the Paper-Book. Perusal\nof the said notice reveals that, learned PCIT(Central) has used powers\nu/s 12AA on 20/4/2024.\nIt will be relevant to note wording of section 12AA(5) in this regard.\nThe said sub-section reads as under\n\"12AA(5) - Noting contained in this section shall apply on or\nafter

INCOME TAX OFFICERV(EXEMPTION) WARD 2, PUNE vs. CREDIA PUNE METRO , PUNE

ITA 655/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

trust, apart from business topics, various awareness, lectures are given to the people attending this exhibition like city development, pollution A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 Credai Pune Metro control, investment proposition and legal assistance to prospective buyers etc. These facts were not refuted by the Department. 10. Further, on identical facts, in the decision of the Delhi Bench

CREDAI - PUNE METRO,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE

ITA 474/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

trust, apart from business topics, various awareness, lectures are given to the people attending this exhibition like city development, pollution A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 Credai Pune Metro control, investment proposition and legal assistance to prospective buyers etc. These facts were not refuted by the Department. 10. Further, on identical facts, in the decision of the Delhi Bench

CREDAI-PUNE METRO,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, PUNE

ITA 473/PUN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

trust, apart from business topics, various awareness, lectures are given to the people attending this exhibition like city development, pollution A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 Credai Pune Metro control, investment proposition and legal assistance to prospective buyers etc. These facts were not refuted by the Department. 10. Further, on identical facts, in the decision of the Delhi Bench