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.

15 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 139(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka451Mumbai301Delhi252Chennai197Bangalore139Kolkata98Pune90Ahmedabad88Jaipur83Hyderabad74Chandigarh61Cochin59Lucknow33Indore30Amritsar28Allahabad21Calcutta18Nagpur15Rajkot15Cuttack15Surat12Visakhapatnam11Telangana9Dehradun9Jodhpur8Agra7Raipur5Patna4Ranchi4Rajasthan3Jabalpur3Varanasi3SC2Punjab & Haryana2Guwahati2Panaji2Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)33Section 1132Section 12A15Section 14813Section 15413Exemption13Section 80P11Section 139(1)10Deduction10Section 11(2)

SHRI RAJKOT VISHASHRIMALI JAIN SAMAJ ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 256/RJT/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.R. Sanghavi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 250Section 288

139(1) of the Act. Therefore, section 13(9) does not make reference to any other sub-section of section 11 and only makes reference to section 11(2) of the Act. Notably, section 11(2) of the Act refers to accumulation that a public charitable trust is expected to make in the event it is unable to spend

8
Addition to Income8
Disallowance5

SHRI SWAMI VIVEKANAND TRUST,ADIPUR vs. THE DCIT (CPC) , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 66/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot12 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(B)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

charitable Trust under section 12A of the Income Tax Act. For the Assessment Year 2014-15, the assessee filed its Return of Income on 30.01.2015. The assessee received Audit Report in Form No. 10B on 24.04.2014 and physically filed the same before the Assessing Officer namely ITO, Gandhidham on 20.05.2014. Invoking section 139(1) of the Act, Centralized Processing Centre

SHREE SWAMINARAYAN MANDIR TRUST ,RAMPAR vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD - 1, RAJKOT

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

ITA 340/RJT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.340/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2020-21)

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 69A

charitable organizations. Due to absence of registration, tax liability is fastened even though they may otherwise be eligible for exemption and fulfil other substantive conditions. However, the power of condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income

LATE ARJAN KANJI PUJARA SMARK CHARITABLE TRUST BHACHAU,BHACHAU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

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

ITA 194/RJT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249(3)

5. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. In fact, it is seen from the intimation dated 03.10.2018 passed u/s. 143(1) of the Act, the concluding part reads as follows: “If you are not satisfied with the intimation u/s. 143(1), you may seek rectification as per section 154 by filing an online

SHRI JAIN SWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK TAPGACHCHH SANGHA,DHORAJI, DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE NFAC (APPEALS) DELHI, DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 168/RJT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 288

5. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the intimation issued under Section 143(1) of the Act by observing as under: “5.1 In the grounds of appeal the appellant contested that the A.O erred in not allowing the expenditure of Rs.14,90,482/- and deduction u/s 11(1) of Rs.2,63,026/-as claimed

SORTHIYA AHIR GNATINO UTARO,BHAVNATH, JUNAGADH vs. THE ADIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

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

ITA 104/RJT/2023[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot12 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 13(9)Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

139(1) of the Act. The assessee’s Rectification Petition was also rejected, as per Section 13(9) of the Act, which prescribes to file the Return within the due date along with the Statement in Form 10. Though CIT(Exemption) denied the condation of filing of Form 10 on the ground that the assessee not invested the funds

KAKADIYA PARIVARNA KULDEVI SHREE BRAHMANI KHODIYAR TRUST,AMRELI vs. THE ITO EXEMPTION, WARD(2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

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

ITA 140/RJT/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiassessment Year: (2021-2022) Kakadiya Parivarna Kuldevi Sghree The Ito Exemption Brahmani Khodiyar Trust Ward-2, Rajkot. Vs. Jaysukhbhai Laljibhai Kakadiya Jarkhida, Ta. Lathi, Amreli Pan : Aadtk 1328 E (Assessee) (Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, ld.Sr.DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 24

5. I have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. I note that assessee has submitted the chart of events, before the Bench, which is reproduced below: Event Date Audit report under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 07-02-2022 obtained

SHRI SAJADIALI SARDAR PATEL SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD. ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD-2(1)(2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

ITA 607/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.607/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Sajadiali Sardar Patel Seva Ito Ward-2, (1) (2) Vs. Sahkari Mandali Ltd. Rajkot – 360001 At Sajadiyali – Rajkot New Aayakar Bhavan, At Sajadiyali Taluka, Race Course Ring Road, Jamkandorana, Dist, Rajkot – 360001 Sajadiyali – Rajkot 360001 Gujrat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas2374L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld .Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28 / 01 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22 / 04/2025

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld .Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80PSection 84

5) of the Income Tax Act stipulates that deductions under Chapter VI-A, which includes Section 80P, are allowable only if the claim is made in the return of income. Furthermore, Section 80AC mandates that such returns must be filed within the due date specified under Section 139(1). Failure to file the return within the prescribed time renders

PATEL KELAVANI MANDAL,TAPOVAN SHAIKSHNIK SANKUL vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD - 2, RAJKOT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 278/RJT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 278/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Hybrid Hearing) Patel Kelavani Mandal, Junagadh. Vs. The Ito (E), Ward – 2, Tapovan Shaikshnik Sankul, Aaykar Bhavan, Bilkha Road, Race Course Ring Road, Junagadh - 362001 Rajkot - 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabtp7542H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

Charitable Trust, is running different types of educational institutions. The assessee has been registered u/s.12AA of the Act w.e.f. AY 2015-16. As such, for the impugned AY 2010-11, the assessee is not entitled to claim exemption of its income u/s.11, 12 and 13 of the Act. The assessee did not file its return of income for the impugned

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

ITA 612/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(iiia)Section 11Section 139Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)

5. It is submitted that, if the Ld. PCCIT would have considered the erroneous legal position and the incorrect factual matrix of the impugned matter, then he would not have granted such an approval. 6. The objective or reasoning behind introduction of Section 151 of the Act is to provide an in-built safeguard and check on exercise of powers

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

ITA 611/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(iiia)Section 11Section 139Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)

5. It is submitted that, if the Ld. PCCIT would have considered the erroneous legal position and the incorrect factual matrix of the impugned matter, then he would not have granted such an approval. 6. The objective or reasoning behind introduction of Section 151 of the Act is to provide an in-built safeguard and check on exercise of powers

SHRI SWAMI VIVEKANAND TRUST,ADIPUR vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 902/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.902/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Swami Vivekanand Trust The Ito (Exemption) बनाम Plot No.1, Dc-2 Ward-1 Rambaug Road Rajkot. Vs. Ward-6A, Adipur. Pan : Aabts 1102 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2025 Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Chennai[In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac’], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 02.05.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Intimation Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Cpc) U/S 143(1) Of The Act, Dated 31.10.2015. Shri Swami Vivekanand Trust 2 2. Grievances Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

section 11 of the Act. The assessee claimed to have obtained an audit report on 06.05.2015, before filing the Income Tax Return, on 11.09.2015, which was physically submitted on 21.05.2015, to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. Although, the assessee acknowledges the oversight of not e- filing the audit report along with the return of income, the assessee eventually e- filed

ACIT, CIR-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI RAJKOT DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD, RAJKOT

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 188/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.188/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Vs. Rajkot District Co-Operative Bank Tax, Circle-1 (1), Rajkot Limited Room No.502, Aayakar Bhawan, Jilla Bankbhavan, Kasturba Road, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot- Opp: Chaudhary High School, 360001 Rajkot 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaar0564K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr : 09/06 /2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08 /2025

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)

139(5) of the I.T. Act. (f) The A.O. work out the profit of the Eligible Business at Rs. 9,36,73,995/ and 20% thereof amounted to 1,87,34,799/- The AO held that since the deduction claimed u/s 36(10(viii) of the Act cannot exceed 20% of the profit of the Eligible Business, the appellant could

SHRI EKTA EDUCATION TRUST,KESHOD vs. THE ITO EXEMPTION, WARD (2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

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

ITA 177/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 177/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2022-23) Shri Ekta Education Trust बनाम Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Professional Academy Primary Ward-2, Rajkot, New Aayakar /Vs. School, Gokuldham Mangrole Road, Bhawan, Race Course Ring Keshod-362 220 Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafts 1570 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri D.M.Rindani, A.R. & Ms. Devina Patel, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)/Addl/Jcit(A)-1, (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”, Dated 12.02.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre/Assessing Officer U/S 143(1) Of The Act. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Visakhapatanam, Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Cpc, Bangalore By Failing To Appreciate That The Actin Of Cpc, Bangalore In Making Adjustments To The Returned Income Of The Appellant By Way Of Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act & In Denying The Benefit Of Sec.11 Of The Appellant Was Not A Case Of Permissible Prima Facie Adjustment.

For Appellant: Shri D.M.Rindani, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)/Addl/JCIT(A)-1, (in short “Ld.CIT(A)”, dated 12.02.2025, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Centralized Processing Centre/Assessing Officer u/s 143(1) of the Act. 2. The grounds of appeal raised

ANKUL CONSTRUCTION CO.,RAJKOT vs. THE ASSIT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX , CPC BENGLURU/ITO WD-1(2)(1), RAJKOT

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 484/RJT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 484/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2020-21) (Hybrid Hearing) Anukul Constriction Co. Vs. Asstt. Director Of Income 901, Aalap-B, Opp. Shastri Ground, Tax, Cpc Bangaluru / Ito Limda Chowk, Ward 1(2)(1), Rajkot – 360001 Aayakar Bhavan, Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakfa2385E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Jay Kathrani, Ld. A.R. Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/02/2025

For Appellant: Shri Jay Kathrani, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(3)Section 28Section 28(1)Section 30Section 38Section 40Section 40a

Section 38 and accordingly not covered u/s 40a(ia). The appellant craves leave to add to alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and/or rescind all or any of the Grounds of Appeal on or before the final hearing, if necessity so arises. 4. Briefly facts of the case that the appellant is Partnership firm and his present jurisdiction of assessment