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.

9 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 3(31)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi592Mumbai533Karnataka472Chennai251Bangalore240Jaipur166Ahmedabad147Hyderabad119Pune109Kolkata107Chandigarh76Lucknow53Cochin45Allahabad34Indore34Cuttack26Rajkot25Amritsar25Visakhapatnam21Raipur20Calcutta17Agra16Nagpur16Telangana16SC15Surat15Jodhpur14Varanasi9Kerala6Jabalpur6Rajasthan5Punjab & Haryana3Ranchi2Patna2Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh2Guwahati1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)18Section 1014Section 12A13Section 1113Section 2(15)12Exemption8Section 124Section 10A4Section 119(2)3

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)

3). Moreover, it may be mentioned that the benefit of Section 11 is not absolute or conclusive. It is subject to control of Sections 60 to 63. If it is found by keeping in view the provisions of Sections 60 to 63 that it is not so includible then such income does not qualify for any relief. 19. The contention

Charitable Trust3

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)

3). Moreover, it may be mentioned that the benefit of Section 11 is not absolute or conclusive. It is subject to control of Sections 60 to 63. If it is found by keeping in view the provisions of Sections 60 to 63 that it is not so includible then such income does not qualify for any relief. 19. The contention

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

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)

3). Moreover, it may be mentioned that the benefit of Section 11 is not absolute or conclusive. It is subject to control of Sections 60 to 63. If it is found by keeping in view the provisions of Sections 60 to 63 that it is not so includible then such income does not qualify for any relief. 19. The contention

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)

3). Moreover, it may be mentioned that the benefit of Section 11 is not absolute or conclusive. It is subject to control of Sections 60 to 63. If it is found by keeping in view the provisions of Sections 60 to 63 that it is not so includible then such income does not qualify for any relief. 19. The contention

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)

3) of the Act, wherein the assessee was given benefit of the provisions of section 11 of the Act, as all the income and expenditure related to the activities carried out for the objects of the trust. It is also a matter of fact that neither the objects have been changed nor the activities of the trust have been found

CENTRAL CHARITABLE TRUST,JAFARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, VARANASI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 12/VNS/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi12 Apr 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalecentral Charitable Trust Vs. Income Tax Officer Jafrapur- 276001, Exemption, Uttar Pradesh. Wardayakarbhawan, Maqboolalam Road, Varanasi 221002 Uttar Pradesh Pan/Gir No. : Aabtc4875G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shriarvind Shukla, Advocate Respondentby : Shri A.K. Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A)Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Central Charitable Trust “1. Because The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Trust Running Educational Institution Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case In The Correct Perspective. 2. Because The Learned Ao As Well As The Learned Cit(A) Have Failed To Appreciate That The Assessee Is Engaged Solely In Running An Educational Institution Having Gross Receipts Below One Crore & Hence No Part Of His Receipts/Income Was Taxable By Virtue Of Clear Unambiguous Provisions Of Section 10(232)(Iiiad). 3. Because The Authorities Below Have Sought To Deny The Benefit Available To The Educational Institution By Clear Provisions Of Section 10(23C)(Iiiad) With Unrelated Provisions Of Section 11/12A When Such Sections Should Not Be Applied To The Facts Of The Case. 4. Because The Authorities Below Have Sought To Deny The Benefit Available To The Educational Institution On The Basis Of Some Inadvertent Technical Errors In Filing Return Without Appreciating The Facts Of The Case. 5. Because The Order Is Bad In Law As Well As On Facts.”

For Appellant: ShriArvind Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(232)(iiiad)Section 10ASection 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

Section 10A/10AA of the Act. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee could not represent before the CIT(A) as Central Charitable Trust the notices were not received. The Ld.AR emphasized that the assessee has received the Registration U/sec12AA of the Act w.e.f 1-4-2015and filed the paper book substantiating with the certificate of affiliation of CBSE

SHRI HARISHANKAR SINGH & SMT. SAROJ DEVI CHARITABLE TRUST,,KUSHINAGAR vs. DCIT, RANGE - II, GORAKHPUR

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

ITA 79/VNS/2019[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi27 May 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Harishankar Singh & Smt. V. Dy. Cit, Saroj Devi Charitable Trust, Range-Ii, Gorakhpur Kushinagar, U.P. Pan-Aahas7138P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. R.L. Verma, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.05.2022

For Appellant: Sh. R.L. Verma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 69

section 69 of the Income Tax Act as an unexplained investment for purchase of land. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) and contended that there was no exchange of purchase consideration as the land in question was transferred by the trustee/manager of the assessee trust without any consideration. However, the Sh. Harishankar Singh

THE SPRINGER EDUCATION FOUNDATION,,GORAKHPUR vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

ITA 10/VNS/2020[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi13 Oct 2022AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Vishwakarma, CIT DR
Section 10

3. It has been noticed that that application u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the IT Act in From No. 56D was belatedly filed on 27.10.2018 for the F.Y. 2018-19(sic. F.Y.2017-18) which should have been filed on or before 30th September, 2018. The delay is not condonable and belated application is liable to be rejected, in the light

ABHISHEK SEWA SANSTHA,CHANDAULI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), LUCKNOW

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 79/VNS/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi23 Nov 2023AY 2021-2022

Bench: Us That Relevant Fact & Correct Position Of Law Has Not Been Considered By Ld. Pcit, Therefore Same Are Discussed In Brief.

For Appellant: Shri. S.K. Garg AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Robin Chaoudhary
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 154Section 80G

charitable objects, it was granted registrationu/s 12AA and was also approved u/s 80G. It has filed its return of income for A.Y. 2021-22 on 15.02.2022, which within the extended due date for filing the return of income for filing returns by the CBDT. However it hasfiled its audit report in Form 10B on 16.09.2022. It is important to note