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.

1,737 results for “capital gains”+ Charitable Trustclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai388Delhi236Chennai205Karnataka167Bangalore146Jaipur83Ahmedabad81Kolkata81Pune58Hyderabad41Chandigarh40Cochin33Indore25Visakhapatnam19Calcutta17Lucknow16Agra15Cuttack15Nagpur13Surat10Amritsar8Telangana7SC6Kerala5Rajkot4Allahabad3Rajasthan3Dehradun2Varanasi2Patna2Andhra Pradesh2Jabalpur2Orissa1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 11100Section 2(15)70Section 12A68Section 143(3)50Exemption50Section 80G42Section 80G(5)40Addition to Income35Section 14725Section 263

HDFC BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2 (3) (1), MUMBAI

ITA 1555/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2019-20
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14A

gains from business and profession'. What happens is that, in the process, when\nthe shares are held as „stock-in-trade", certain dividend is also earned, though\nincidentally, which is also an income. However, by virtue of Section 10 (34) of the\nAct, this dividend income is not to be included in the total income and is exempt from\ntax

THE GATE OF HOPE CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-2,, CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2006/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Showing 1–20 of 1,737 · Page 1 of 87

...
25
Disallowance23
Charitable Trust22
For Appellant: Ms. T.V.Muthu Abirami
For Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 80G

Charitable Trust ::12 :: totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and transactions and the persons with whom the transactions had taken transactions and the persons with whom the transactions

THE GATE OF HOPE CHARITABLE TRUST,,CHENNAI vs. ITO(E), WARD-2,, CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1372/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Ms. T.V.Muthu AbiramiFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 80G

Charitable Trust ::12 :: totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and transactions and the persons with whom the transactions had taken transactions and the persons with whom the transactions

ADIT (E) RG I, MUMBAI vs. MEHTA CHARITY TRUST, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1069/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2004-05 The Ddit(E)I(1), Mehta Charity Trust, R. No.504, Piramal Top Floor, Mehta Mahal, 15Th बनाम/ Chambers, 5Thfloor, Parel, Mathew Road, Opera House, Vs. Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400004 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aaatm5060A

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

charitable or religious trusts are required to sell, in the interest of the trust, capital assets forming part of the corpus of the trust property solely with a view to acquiring other capital assets to be held as part of the corpus of trust. The requirement that the capital gains

DATTATRAY N SAWANT HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No 2360/Mum/2013 is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2360/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(47)Section 45(1)

Charitable Trust without any monetary consideration as transfer of capital asset and charged tax on the capital gain as per stamp

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, , CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2288/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT them named the Assessee trust or any of the trustees. He further stated what no opportunity of cross-examination was given to the Assessee to cross examine those students/parents/guardian despite there being specific request made by the Assessee to the AO during the Assessment proceedings. 18. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that while making the addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2291/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT them named the Assessee trust or any of the trustees. He further stated what no opportunity of cross-examination was given to the Assessee to cross examine those students/parents/guardian despite there being specific request made by the Assessee to the AO during the Assessment proceedings. 18. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that while making the addition

SARASWATHI AMMAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRE CIRCLE II, NOIDA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2181/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT them named the Assessee trust or any of the trustees. He further stated what no opportunity of cross-examination was given to the Assessee to cross examine those students/parents/guardian despite there being specific request made by the Assessee to the AO during the Assessment proceedings. 18. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that while making the addition

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2289/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT them named the Assessee trust or any of the trustees. He further stated what no opportunity of cross-examination was given to the Assessee to cross examine those students/parents/guardian despite there being specific request made by the Assessee to the AO during the Assessment proceedings. 18. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that while making the addition

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2291/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi03 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT them named the Assessee trust or any of the trustees. He further stated what no opportunity of cross-examination was given to the Assessee to cross examine those students/parents/guardian despite there being specific request made by the Assessee to the AO during the Assessment proceedings. 18. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that while making the addition

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2290/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi03 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT them named the Assessee trust or any of the trustees. He further stated what no opportunity of cross-examination was given to the Assessee to cross examine those students/parents/guardian despite there being specific request made by the Assessee to the AO during the Assessment proceedings. 18. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that while making the addition

GOBINDRAM CHANDRAMANI VIVEK,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 1(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in the manner indicated in this order

ITA 656/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok A Kulkarni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54F

gains, otherwise it would lead to double deduction of the same expenses viz. interest on housing loan on acquisition of capital asset, which is not permissible. The assessee reliance on judgment and orders of Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable Foundation(supra) , in our humble considered view is not correct, as it was in context of computing firstly, application of income

ACIT-17(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA EMPLOYEES STOCK OPTION TRUST., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1119/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
Section 112Section 143(3)Section 250

capital gain arising from sale of equity shares is provided u/s 111A as 15%. However relevant income which purpose is charged to tax as per the provisions of section 164(2) which reads as under:- "[(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable

ACIT 17(1) , MUMBAI vs. MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA EMPLOYEES STOCK OPTION TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1120/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2016-17
Section 112Section 143(3)Section 250

capital gain arising from sale of equity shares is provided u/s 111A as 15%. However relevant income which purpose is charged to tax as per the provisions of section 164(2) which reads as under:- "[(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable

SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3010/MUM/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2015-2016
For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh – Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Dr Kishor Dhule (CIT-DR)
Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(2)Section 80G

gainfully refer to the following observations of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shri Marudhar Kesari Sthanakwasi Jain Yadgar Samiti Trust Vs UOI (273 ITR 425), which reads as follows:- “..we may notice that since the judgment was delivered in Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 578 (SC), Parliament has intervened

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3210/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh – Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Dr Kishor Dhule (CIT-DR)
Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(2)Section 80G

gainfully refer to the following observations of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shri Marudhar Kesari Sthanakwasi Jain Yadgar Samiti Trust Vs UOI (273 ITR 425), which reads as follows:- “..we may notice that since the judgment was delivered in Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 578 (SC), Parliament has intervened

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3049/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh – Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Dr Kishor Dhule (CIT-DR)
Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(2)Section 80G

gainfully refer to the following observations of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shri Marudhar Kesari Sthanakwasi Jain Yadgar Samiti Trust Vs UOI (273 ITR 425), which reads as follows:- “..we may notice that since the judgment was delivered in Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 578 (SC), Parliament has intervened

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3209/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh – Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Dr Kishor Dhule (CIT-DR)
Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(2)Section 80G

gainfully refer to the following observations of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shri Marudhar Kesari Sthanakwasi Jain Yadgar Samiti Trust Vs UOI (273 ITR 425), which reads as follows:- “..we may notice that since the judgment was delivered in Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 578 (SC), Parliament has intervened

INCOME TAX OFFICER(E) WARD- 2(4), NEW DELHI, CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI vs. PRAKASH SEWA TRUST, PASCHIM VIHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4305/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

trusts, D IT can invest proceeds of sale of capital assets in\nacquiring new capital asset and the capital gain shall be deemed to\nhave been applied to charitable

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 204/NAG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur Pan No.:Aanpg 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal By Revenue Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur Dated 30/03/2017 In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 4/198/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 68Section 69C

Capital Gain was duly shown by the appellant. He is rather motivated by his desire to bring the said sale proceeds under the maximum tax rate by treating it as unexplained cash credits u/s 68. I do not agree with the treatment given by the AO to said receipts. In fact, during one such hearing I clarified