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.

91 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 35clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi515Mumbai505Karnataka472Bangalore272Chennai247Ahmedabad145Jaipur141Pune91Chandigarh89Kolkata80Hyderabad80Lucknow55Cochin45Indore29Cuttack22Rajkot22Amritsar21Surat19Visakhapatnam17Calcutta17Agra17Allahabad15Nagpur15Telangana10Jodhpur9Raipur8Varanasi7SC7Kerala5Dehradun5Patna5Rajasthan3Jabalpur2Andhra Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 12A153Section 11151Exemption59Section 132(4)56Section 143(3)50Addition to Income42Section 153C38Charitable Trust37Section 80G35

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)

35 (Del) has held that the donation by a charitable trust to another charitable trust with condition that the amount will form part of corpus of the donee trust is application of income by the donor trust within the meaning of section

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

Showing 1–20 of 91 · Page 1 of 5

Section 80G(5)32
Section 2(15)29
Deduction18

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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)

Charitable Trust and elaborated on the provisions of section 2(24)(iia) of the Act. Eventually, as per the discussion given in Para No.D9 of the order, the AO held that “corpus donation” does not tantamount to exempt income as laid down u/s.2(24)(iia) of the Act. AO drew our attention parallel to the provisions of section 12A/11

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)

35% of the gross receipts of the hospital. Even for F.Y. 2010-11 it was very much disproportionate and the ld. AO held that there has been an infringement of section 13(1)(c) r.w.s.13(2)(c) of the Act. In this regard, the ld. AO examined the facts of the assessee’s case and observed that the salary

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

trust has denied to be indulged into any of such alleged transaction in the statement given during the course of search.\n12. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has not pressed the issue challenging the jurisdiction assumed by ld.PCIT. Thus, Grounds of appeal No.1 and 2 raised by the assessee are dismissed as ‘not pressed'.\n13. Now we take

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 Act, 1963. We have also gone through the various judicial decisions relied on by the assessee and are of the view that the issue raised in this appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by these decisions. Accordingly, we conclude that the activities carried on by the assessee are of charitable nature and come within the definition

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 Act, 1963. We have also gone through the various judicial decisions relied on by the assessee and are of the view that the issue raised in this appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by these decisions. Accordingly, we conclude that the activities carried on by the assessee are of charitable nature and come within the definition

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 Act, 1963. We have also gone through the various judicial decisions relied on by the assessee and are of the view that the issue raised in this appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by these decisions. Accordingly, we conclude that the activities carried on by the assessee are of charitable nature and come within the definition

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 Act, 1963. We have also gone through the various judicial decisions relied on by the assessee and are of the view that the issue raised in this appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by these decisions. Accordingly, we conclude that the activities carried on by the assessee are of charitable nature and come within the definition

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 Act, 1963. We have also gone through the various judicial decisions relied on by the assessee and are of the view that the issue raised in this appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by these decisions. Accordingly, we conclude that the activities carried on by the assessee are of charitable nature and come within the definition

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 Act, 1963. We have also gone through the various judicial decisions relied on by the assessee and are of the view that the issue raised in this appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by these decisions. Accordingly, we conclude that the activities carried on by the assessee are of charitable nature and come within the definition

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)

charitable purposes, even if it was towards the corpus of the other Trust. Similar is the decision of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Shri Ram Memorial Foundation (2004) 269 ITR 35. (iii) I have considered the submission of the appellant and gone through the provision of Section

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. Assessee trust is also engaged in the activity of running restaurant, bar, card club, venue hall and sport activity. Assessee claimed that all these activities are covered u/s.2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1962. Assessee claimed that the main object of the assessee relates to promotion of sports. Assessee filed the return of income declaring ‘Nil’. During

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

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

section (3) of section 143 for any\nprevious year; or\nc) Such case has been selected in accordance with the risk\nmanagement strategy, formulated by the Board from time to\ntime, for any previous year;\nThe Principal Commissioner or Commissioner shall—\ni.\ncall for such documents or information from the trust\nor institution, or make such inquiry as he thinks

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)

charitable as contemplated in section 2(15) of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2008 and Finance Act 2010. 5.4 The Assessing Officer at Para 5.11 of his order, therefore, held that the case of the assessee is clearly hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Act inserted with effect from

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

ITA 654/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)

charitable as contemplated in section 2(15) of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2008 and Finance Act 2010. 5.4 The Assessing Officer at Para 5.11 of his order, therefore, held that the case of the assessee is clearly hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Act inserted with effect from

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)

charitable as contemplated in section 2(15) of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2008 and Finance Act 2010. 5.4 The Assessing Officer at Para 5.11 of his order, therefore, held that the case of the assessee is clearly hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Act inserted with effect from

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)

charitable as contemplated in section 2(15) of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2008 and Finance Act 2010. 5.4 The Assessing Officer at Para 5.11 of his order, therefore, held that the case of the assessee is clearly hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Act inserted with effect from

BHANSILAL RAMNATH AGARWAL CHARITABLE TRUST vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1134/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1147, 1133, 1134 & 1136/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 36

charitable trust and is registered u/s.12A of the Income Tax Act. For this year, the assessee filed its return of income declaring exemption u/s.11. The learned A.O. completed the asst. wherein he has denied exemption u/s.11. According to the A.O., the assessee had violated the provisions of section 13 and therefore, was not entitled for claiming exemption u/s.11. The learned

BHANSILAL RAMNATH AGARWAL CHARITABLE TRUST vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1147/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1147, 1133, 1134 & 1136/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 36

charitable trust and is registered u/s.12A of the Income Tax Act. For this year, the assessee filed its return of income declaring exemption u/s.11. The learned A.O. completed the asst. wherein he has denied exemption u/s.11. According to the A.O., the assessee had violated the provisions of section 13 and therefore, was not entitled for claiming exemption u/s.11. The learned