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.

5,286 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 2(15)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,141Delhi1,045Chennai561Bangalore498Ahmedabad306Pune290Jaipur240Kolkata214Hyderabad150Chandigarh88Lucknow73Surat72Rajkot65Amritsar64Indore61Cochin50Visakhapatnam41Nagpur34Allahabad31Agra28Jodhpur26Patna25Raipur25Cuttack22SC20Karnataka17Ranchi17Panaji15Kerala11Guwahati10Calcutta9Punjab & Haryana7Dehradun7Rajasthan7Telangana6Jabalpur4Himachal Pradesh2Andhra Pradesh2Orissa1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 12A113Section 1182Addition to Income58Exemption53Section 80G38Section 153C31Section 139(1)30Section 80G(5)30Section 6929Section 132

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ALL INDIA GEM AND JEWELLERY DOMESTIC COUNCIL, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4652/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Respondent: Mr. Firoz Andhyarujina
Section 11Section 2(15)

section 11 to 13 r.w.s. 2(15) and come to a conclusion .w.s. 2(15) and come to a conclusion without invoking principles of mutuality. The Appellant is a charitable without invoking principles of mutuality. The Appellant is a charitable without invoking principles of mutuality. The Appellant is a charitable trust

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

ITA 1555/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 5,286 · Page 1 of 265

...
29
Search & Seizure29
Charitable Trust21
ITAT Mumbai
06 Oct 2025
AY 2019-20
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14A

15== Page | 16\nITA No. 1555, 1573, 2258, 2259 & 2260 Mum 2025\nΑ.Υ. 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22\nHDFC Bank Limited, Mumbai\nassessee and the assessee alone. Therefore, even at the time of investing into those\nshares, the assessee knows that it may generate dividend income as well as and\nwhen such dividend income is generated that would

ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 181/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.181 & 182/Lkw/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational Vs. Dcit, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly Pan: Aaatr6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. S.H. Usmani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: [ These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Lucknow Dated 19.03.2024 & 22.03.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19, Dismissing The Appeals Of The Assessee Against Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “(1).That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering The Fact That In The Alleged Assessment Order, The Columns Of Name Of Assessee, Pan, Asst Year, Date Of Assessment & Section Under Which Passed, Are Blank. (2)That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating The Demand As Valid Which Was Not Computed On The Basis Of Orderthat May Not Be Termed To Be An Order Under Section 143(3). (3) That A Demand Of Tax As Computed In The Computation Sheet Is Without Jurisdiction Void-Ab-Inito & Is Liable To Be Annulled. (4) That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 736591857/-Comprising  Corpus Donation Aggregating To Rs 7,68,95,000/-, A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

15% amount was accumulated or set aparti.e. for the charitable objects of the trust. Our attention was invited to section 11(2

ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 182/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nSh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: \nSh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

15% amount was accumulated or set aparti.e. for the charitable objects\nof the trust. Our attention was invited to section 11(2

M/S. INNOVATIVE MICRFINANCE FOR POVERTY ALLEVIATION & COMMUNITY TRANSFORMATION,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1161/CHNY/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025
Section 11Section 80G

2(15) and the assessee is not entitled for\nthe benefit of section 11 for that part of income generated in the hands of the\nassessee Running its micro finance business. Alternatively, one has to look into\nsection 11(4A).. Sub-section (4A) provides that exemption shall not apply in\nrelation to any income of a trust or an institution

SHREE KHANDELWAL DIGAMBAR JAIN FOUNDATION,AURANGABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE

ITA 2554/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2024-25
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 8Section 80G

section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act. The ratio of the cited case law in Embassy Charitable Trust (supra

ST. JOSEPHS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

ITA 3297/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 270ASection 271A

charitable trust formed\non 02.04.2012 and enjoyed section 12AA registration w.e.f. 29.05.2012\nvide registration dated 26.12.2012. The assessee is noted to be running\nan Engineering College and has claimed exemption u/s.11 of the Act since\nits inception. In the year under consideration, i.e. AY 2018-19, the\nassessee is noted to have filed return of income (RoI) u/s.139

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-A, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 233/LKW/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 2(15)Section 3

section 2(15), inter alia, observed that main object is to be considered and incidentally 1f some profit is made and the said profit is used for charitable purpose the said trust

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-A, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 234/LKW/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 2(15)Section 3

section 2(15), inter alia, observed that main object is to be considered and incidentally 1f some profit is made and the said profit is used for charitable purpose the said trust

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-A, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 235/LKW/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 2(15)Section 3

section 2(15), inter alia, observed that main object is to be considered and incidentally 1f some profit is made and the said profit is used for charitable purpose the said trust

RAEBARELI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAEBARELI vs. CIT-APPEAL, NFAC DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 232/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 2(15)Section 3

section 2(15), inter alia, observed that main object is to be considered and incidentally 1f some profit is made and the said profit is used for charitable purpose the said trust

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

section 115BBC. ii) The assessee trust has shown total receipts of Rs. 43,92,697/- in the ITR out of which Rs. 41,73,070/- were applied for the charitable or religious purposes and rest Rs. 2,19,627/- were set apart being less than 15

BHARAT DIAMOND BOURSE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (E)- 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 2219/MUM/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2025AY 2009-2010
Section 2(15)Section 45(1)Section 6

charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act.\nA. General test under Section 2(15)\n\nA. 1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general public utility cannot engage itself in any trade, commerce or business, or provide service in relation thereto for any consideration (“cess

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

sections of the Society including women, youth, handicapped, working children of the Society including women, youth, handicapped, working children of the Society including women, youth, handicapped, working children drug addicts, urban and rural poor to enhance their social, cultur drug addicts, urban and rural poor to enhance their social, cultur drug addicts, urban and rural poor to enhance their social

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

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

sections of the Society including women, youth, handicapped, working children of the Society including women, youth, handicapped, working children of the Society including women, youth, handicapped, working children drug addicts, urban and rural poor to enhance their social, cultur drug addicts, urban and rural poor to enhance their social, cultur drug addicts, urban and rural poor to enhance their social

DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MORADABAD

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

ITA 273/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh. Mradul Agarwal C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Mazahar Akram, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 154Section 2(15)Section 250

section 2(15) w.e.f. 1.04.2009, certain bodies that had hitherto been treated as, ‘charitable trust’ on the ground of objects

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

ITA 1073/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh. Mradul Agarwal C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Mazahar Akram, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 154Section 2(15)Section 250

section 2(15) w.e.f. 1.04.2009, certain bodies that had hitherto been treated as, ‘charitable trust’ on the ground of objects

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

ITA 1072/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh. Mradul Agarwal C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Mazahar Akram, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 154Section 2(15)Section 250

section 2(15) w.e.f. 1.04.2009, certain bodies that had hitherto been treated as, ‘charitable trust’ on the ground of objects

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 87/ALLD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

section 2(15) the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with an intention to make profit and where the trust is carrying out its activities on non-commercial lines, with no motive to earn profits for the fulfillment of its aims and objectives, which are charitable

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 88/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

section 2(15) the activities of the trust should be carried out on commercial lines with an intention to make profit and where the trust is carrying out its activities on non-commercial lines, with no motive to earn profits for the fulfillment of its aims and objectives, which are charitable