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.

4,553 results for “charitable trust”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi591Mumbai570Karnataka501Chennai376Pune373Ahmedabad369Bangalore311Jaipur260Hyderabad151Kolkata112Amritsar90Chandigarh87Lucknow82Surat81Cochin71Visakhapatnam60Cuttack55Indore43Nagpur43Rajkot38Allahabad35Agra32Jodhpur28Calcutta26Telangana24Raipur23Panaji22Patna15Varanasi15Jabalpur13Dehradun11Kerala8Punjab & Haryana8SC8Ranchi7Rajasthan5Guwahati5Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh2

Key Topics

Section 12A251Section 80G98Exemption87Section 80G(5)69Section 12A(1)(ac)63Section 1153Natural Justice36Charitable Trust35Addition to Income30Section 143(3)

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

charitable trust for which the assessee has claimed 50% of the total donation\npaid as deduction u/s.800 of the Act. Prior to the Finance (No.2) Act, 2014, the said\nexpenditure was claimed as 'business expenditure' u/s.37(1) of the Act where after the\ninsertion of Explanation 2 to section 37(1) of the Act, the CSR expenses referred

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

Showing 1–20 of 4,553 · Page 1 of 228

...
24
Section 2(15)22
Section 80G(5)(iii)21
For Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(47)Section 45(1)

natural justice in accordance with law. Even for the sake of argument it is accepted that the school Building is owned by the trust then in that scenario the assessee has transferred land valued at Rs. 30,84,480/- and in lieu got the land from Vatsalabhai Dattatray Sawant Charitable

M/S MANTHAN INC,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX CIRCLE, 19(2) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2663/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Manthan Inc, Acit Cir. 19(2), Rani Bldg., V.P. Road, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai. Pan No. Aakfm 6011 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Dilip Diwan, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2023

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Dilip Diwan, AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35A

natural justice. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has not consider the order pass by The Ld. CIT(A) has not consider the order pass by The Ld. CIT(A) has not consider the order pass by Honorable ITAT dated 07.10.2021. Honorable ITAT dated 07.10.2021. 3. Your appellate there for prays your Your appellate there for prays your honor to delete

M/S MANTHAN INC ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX CIRCLE, 19(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2664/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Manthan Inc, Acit Cir. 19(2), Rani Bldg., V.P. Road, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai. Pan No. Aakfm 6011 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Dilip Diwan, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2023

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Dilip Diwan, AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35A

natural justice. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has not consider the order pass by The Ld. CIT(A) has not consider the order pass by The Ld. CIT(A) has not consider the order pass by Honorable ITAT dated 07.10.2021. Honorable ITAT dated 07.10.2021. 3. Your appellate there for prays your Your appellate there for prays your honor to delete

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 265/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 268/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 264/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 269/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 261/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 263/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 470/CTK/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 266/CTK/2019[2008--09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 267/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 262/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 469/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 270/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 471/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

RONALD EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 368/CTK/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay (supra) is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond its control. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 4. We advert to the sole identical issue of section 10(23C)(vi) approval raised in assessee’s cases in ITA Nos. 259/H/2019, 260/H/2019, 368/H/2019, 258/H/2019, 261/H/2019, 262/H/2019, 263/H/2019

JINSEVA FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appe

ITA 3531/MUM/2025[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2025-2026

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

For Appellant: Mr. Margav Shukla
Section 11Section 12A

charitable trust or institution shall be applied outside India. Even if it is applied outside India, then the assessee, subject to sec. applied outside India. Even if it is applied outside India, then the assessee, subject to sec. applied outside India. Even if it is applied outside India, then the assessee, subject to sec. 11(c) of the Act, would

SHRI SHESHAVTAR 1008 SHRI KALLAJI VEDPITH EVAM SHODH SANSTHAN,NIMBAHERA, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, UDAIPUR, AAYKAR BHAWAN, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 268/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, CA &For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 234DSection 250

charitable purpose other than any anonymus donation made with a specific direction that such donation is for any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution run by such trust or institution”. Therefore, confirming that the donation received are taxable u/s 115BBC is quite unjustified, illegal and not based on the provisions of Income