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.

19 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 6clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,844Delhi1,545Chennai1,050Ahmedabad853Bangalore799Pune774Karnataka591Jaipur477Kolkata446Hyderabad302Chandigarh247Cochin199Amritsar198Surat190Rajkot152Cuttack151Lucknow139Indore138Visakhapatnam129Nagpur101Agra67Raipur62Allahabad53Jodhpur51Patna49Ranchi37Telangana35Calcutta29Panaji24SC23Varanasi19Jabalpur19Dehradun16Guwahati14Kerala13Rajasthan9Punjab & Haryana8Orissa5Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh2J&K1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 1036Section 12A33Section 1119Section 143(3)18Exemption16Section 2(15)14Section 14810Section 13(1)(c)6Section 12A(1)5

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)

Section 60 to 63 of the 1961 Act deals with revocable transfer of assets, and for creation of valid trust, transfer of the assets for charitable purposes should be irrevocable, which as per AO is not fulfilled in the case of the assessee. The AO observed that the assessee is neither in the field of education , nor in the field

Charitable Trust5
Natural Justice4
Deduction2

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)

Section 60 to 63 of the 1961 Act deals with revocable transfer of assets, and for creation of valid trust, transfer of the assets for charitable purposes should be irrevocable, which as per AO is not fulfilled in the case of the assessee. The AO observed that the assessee is neither in the field of education , nor in the field

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)

Section 60 to 63 of the 1961 Act deals with revocable transfer of assets, and for creation of valid trust, transfer of the assets for charitable purposes should be irrevocable, which as per AO is not fulfilled in the case of the assessee. The AO observed that the assessee is neither in the field of education , nor in the field

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)

Section 60 to 63 of the 1961 Act deals with revocable transfer of assets, and for creation of valid trust, transfer of the assets for charitable purposes should be irrevocable, which as per AO is not fulfilled in the case of the assessee. The AO observed that the assessee is neither in the field of education , nor in the field

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)

charitable activities as per object of the trust. :-5-: Therefore no verification of the object as per the trust deed with the activities carried out if any could be made. Thus the genuineness of the activities does not get established. Section 12AB makes it very clear that before granting registration under this section, the Commissioner has to satisfy himself about

SURYA SEWA SANSTHAN,AURAI vs. CIT (E),, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 167/VNS/2019[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi08 Jul 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2019-20 Surya Sewa Sansthan, V. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), 5Th Floor, South C/O Surya Carpet (P), Ltd., G.T. Road, Aurai, Sant Ravidas Nagar- Block T.C./46V, Upsidc Ltd 221301 Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Pan-Aaoas1629Q Lucknow-226010 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Adv Respondent By: Cit-Dr (Absent) Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.07.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: CIT-DR (Absent)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 2(15)

section 12A(1) was wholly erroneous, based on extraneous consideration and even beyond the scope of the authority of CIT(E) in this respect. 4. Because the charitable intent of the appellant trust, as was expressed in the trust deed dated 10.12.2015, got fully established with the commencement of the “Surya Trauma Center & Hospital”, and due recognition for the same

MATH GARWA GHAT GO-SANRAKSHAN NYAS,VARANASI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 34/VNS/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi29 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year:N.A. Math Garwa Ghat Go-Sanrakshan V. The Cit (Exemptions) Nyas Varanasi 1, Bangla Kuti, Ramna Varanasi Tan/Pan:Aaatm8624J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jindal & Shri V. K. Jindal Respondent By: Shri Robin Chaudhary, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25 09 2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 29 09 2023

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jindal & shri V. K. JindalFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 12A

6- That the Learned CIT erred in holding activities of the Trust are not genuine and the documentary evidence with regard to charitable activities of the Trust has not been furnished by assessee. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust was engaged in providing asyluym/shelter to Cows and maintaining gaushalas and famine relief centres

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)

Section 114(g) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, that evidence which could be and is not produced would, if produced, be unfavourable to the person who withholds it. The assessee in the instant case failed to produce relevant evidences, as outlined above. Thus, based on 6 Assessment Year: N.A. Surya Charitable Trust

MOUSAMI CHOUDHURY,VARANASI vs. DY. CIT, RANGE - 02,, VARANASI

In the result , the appeal filed the assessee in ITA No

ITA 214/VNS/2019[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi28 Dec 2022AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh.ArvindShukla, Adv. & Sh. AsimZafar, AdvFor Respondent: ShriA.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148

6, who is not required to furnish a return under this sub-section and who at any time during the previous year,— (a) holds, as a beneficial owner or otherwise, any asset (including any financial interest in any entity) located outside India or has signing authority in any account located outside India; or (b) is a beneficiary of any asset

MOUSAMI CHOUDHURY,VARANASI vs. DY. CIT, RANGE - 2, VARANASI

In the result , the appeal filed the assessee in ITA No

ITA 213/VNS/2019[201-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi28 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh.ArvindShukla, Adv. & Sh. AsimZafar, AdvFor Respondent: ShriA.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148

6, who is not required to furnish a return under this sub-section and who at any time during the previous year,— (a) holds, as a beneficial owner or otherwise, any asset (including any financial interest in any entity) located outside India or has signing authority in any account located outside India; or (b) is a beneficiary of any asset

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

6,59,020/- which were not disclosed in the balance sheet of the assessee trust. Accordingly, the AO made an addition of the said amount under 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

GONA FOUNDATION TRUST,,ROBERTSGANJ vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

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

ITA 217/VNS/2019[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi26 May 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kocharn.A. Gona Foundation Trust, V. Cit-(Exemption), Ward-16, Akhara Mohal, Lucknow Robertsganj, Sonebhadra-231216 Pan-Aactg9390H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. K.R. Singh, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma, Cit D.R. Date Of Hearing: 26.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.05.2022

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma, CIT D.R
Section 12A

section 12AA(1)(b) of the Act, two factors namely the object of charitable purpose and the genuineness of activities have to be proved before granting the registration. However, the applicant failed to prove the same. Hence, the applicant trust has not made a case for granting the registration u/s 12AA(1)(b).” 5. It is clear from para

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

Charitable Trust, Barnala Vs CBDT (2010) 195 taxmann 88 (Punj. & Har), the issue of rejection of claim for grant of exemption for application filed after the prescribed period had been considered by Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The Court observed as under: "It is conceded position that the assessee-petitioner has filed the application on 23.09.2008 seeking

ATMANUSANDHAN KENDRA KALYANPURI,CHANDUALI vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 221/VNS/2019[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi27 May 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: N.A. Atmanusandhan Kendra The Cit(Exemption), Kalyanpuri, Baaharvani, V. 5Th Floor, South Block, T.C./46V, Paura, Chanduli-232103, Upsidc Ltd., Vibhutikhand, U.P. Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, U.P. Pan:Aapca 0369N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: ShriRamendra Kumar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)

section of the public and not specific individuals. Please include this clause in your Society Deed/Memorandum of Association and file a certified copy of the amended SocietyDeed/Memorandum of Association. 17. Your Society Deed/Memorandum of Association does not have any clause providing that in theevent of dissolution of society/society/non profit company, the fund/assets of the society/society non profit company will

BLOSSAM HOUSE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,VARANASI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 3(1), VARANASI

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

ITA 6/VNS/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi07 Jul 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2018-19 Blossam House Educational V. Income Tax Officer, Society, 579, Teliabagh, Church Ward-3(1), Varanasi Compound, Maldahiya, Varanasi Pan-Aaatb7686D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Atul Choudhary, C.A. Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 07.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.07.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. Atul Choudhary, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 40

trust. An identical amount of Rs. 19,90,762/- is also shown in the column giving details of exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad). From these facts, it is clear that the amount showed as exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) is nothing but the amount of accumulated income to be applied for charitable purpose in future is repeated mistakenly

SANT KACHACHA BABA LOK SEWA TRUST,,VARANASI vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

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

ITA 319/ALLD/2017[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi22 Apr 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriRahul R. Gabhawala, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Bajpai, CIT DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

Section 3 Assessment Year: N.A. SantKachacha Baba LokSewa Trust, Varanasi 13(3) of the 1961 Act. Thus, in nut-shell the ld. CIT(E) held that the assessee failed to prove that it is undertaking its educational activities for charitable purposes , rather on the other hand it is running its educational activities on commercial grounds, and also that the assessee

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

section 140A of the Act within the due date (without extension under Circular No.9/2021, Circular No.17/2021 and this Circular) provided in that Act, shall be deemed to be the advance tax.” 6. This circular is not at all applicable and has wrongly been quoted by Ld.PCIT. The relevant circularson condonation of delay forfilling of Form

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