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.

7 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 13(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai842Delhi748Karnataka514Chennai478Bangalore394Pune197Jaipur177Ahmedabad167Kolkata153Hyderabad132Chandigarh103Lucknow62Surat46Indore46Rajkot43Cuttack37Amritsar36Cochin35Visakhapatnam32Agra28Jodhpur25Telangana25Calcutta24Nagpur23Allahabad20Raipur18SC16Kerala10Guwahati8Patna8Varanasi7Dehradun6Punjab & Haryana5Rajasthan5Panaji3Ranchi3Andhra Pradesh2Orissa2Jabalpur2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)18Section 12A14Section 2(15)12Section 1011Section 1110Exemption7Section 13(1)(c)6Section 13(3)5Section 124Charitable Trust

SURYA CHARITABLE TRUST,,VARANASI vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

ITA 142/ALLD/2018[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi13 Oct 2022AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Vishwakarma, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)

1)(c) read with Section 13(3) of the 1961 Act, and based on facts and circumstances of the case the benefit is given to related parties covered under Section 13(3) . Reference is also drawn to the provisions of Section 114(g) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, that evidence which could be and is not produced would

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , VARANASI

2
Natural Justice2

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 264/ALLD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

13 of the 1961 Act. The audit report under Section 44AB was also filed by the assessee in prescribed form No. 3CB and 3CD. The AO observed that the object of the assessee-authority as defined under Section 7 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973and as submitted by the assessee in written reply before

VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 266/ALLD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

13 of the 1961 Act. The audit report under Section 44AB was also filed by the assessee in prescribed form No. 3CB and 3CD. The AO observed that the object of the assessee-authority as defined under Section 7 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973and as submitted by the assessee in written reply before

VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 267/ALLD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

13 of the 1961 Act. The audit report under Section 44AB was also filed by the assessee in prescribed form No. 3CB and 3CD. The AO observed that the object of the assessee-authority as defined under Section 7 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973and as submitted by the assessee in written reply before

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 265/ALLD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

13 of the 1961 Act. The audit report under Section 44AB was also filed by the assessee in prescribed form No. 3CB and 3CD. The AO observed that the object of the assessee-authority as defined under Section 7 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973and as submitted by the assessee in written reply before

MATH GARWA GHAT (TRUST),VARANASI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 33/VNS/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi29 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year: N.A. Math Gadwaghat Trust V. The Cit (Exemptions) Bangla Kuti, Ramna Varanasi Varanasi Tan/Pan:Aaets8008G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jindal & Shri V. K. JindalFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

trust and building repairs, etc. The major expenditure relates to charitable activities. Even the expenditure under the head administrative expenses, nowhere it has been pointed out that there is any violation of the provisions of section 13(1)(c

GYAN PEETH TRUST,SONEBHADRA vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 163/VNS/2019[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi15 Apr 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: N.A. Gyanpeeth Trust, The Cit(Exemption), Ternahi, Robertsganj, T.C. 46-V , Sonebhadra-222645, Up State Construction& Uttar Pradesh V. Infrastructure Development Corporation, Vibhutikhand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow-226010, Uttar Pradesh Pan:Aabtg9961D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Shukla, Advocate and Mr. Ashish Zafar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Ramendra Kumar
Section 10Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)

charitable purposes and allegedly exaggerated and bogus expenses were claimed. Based on material on record, the ld. CIT(E) observed that the activities of the assessee were not genuine , and it was also observed that the part of income was applied for the benefit of persons specified in Section 13(1)(c) read with Section 13