Section 10(23C)(v) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.11

Section 10(23C)(v) falls under section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 11 (Incomes not included in total income) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 11 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 10(23C)(v) is Queen’s Educational Society v. CIT (372 ITR 699), cited in 152 of the 37 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10(23C)(v)

Queen’s Educational Society v. CIT
372 ITR 699 · 2015 · Supreme Court
152
citing judgments

An educational institution that generates a surplus does not automatically lose its charitable status or cease to exist solely for educational purposes. This is true if the surplus is reinvested for its educational objectives, and the predominant object test determines if the institution's primary aim is education or profit.

Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT
224 ITR 310 · 1997 · Supreme Court
121
citing judgments

A charitable educational institution or trust does not lose its charitable character merely because it generates a surplus, provided its primary object remains charitable and it does not operate for profit. The assessment of charitable nature should focus on the institution's objects rather than the quantum of surplus generated.

Oxford Academy for Career Development v. Chief CIT
315 ITR 382 · 2009 · High Court
37
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) has no power to cancel registration granted under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act retrospectively, especially when there is no express provision in the Act for such cancellation and the order is quasi-judicial in nature.

Queens Education Society v. CIT
231 Taxmann 286 · 2015 · Supreme Court
18
citing judgments
CIT v. Devradhan Madhavlal Genda Trust
230 ITR 714 · 1998 · High Court
12
citing judgments

Filing of the audit report in Form No. 10B with the return of income is not mandatory for claiming exemption under Section 11. If the report is filed after the return but within the period permitted by law, the exemption cannot be denied.

Association of Corporation & Apex Societies of Handlooms v. Asstt. DIT
351 ITR 287 · 2013 · High Court
8
citing judgments
CIT-III, Pune v. Sakal Relief Fund
295 CTR 561 · 2017 · High Court
7
citing judgments
National Horticulture Board v. Chief CIT
176 Taxmann 167 · 2009 · High Court
6
citing judgments
ACIT v. Stock Exchange Ahmedabad
25 Taxmann.com 469 · 2012 · High Court
5
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 10(23C)(v)

M/S Jain Swetamber Society, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward -1(1), Exemption, Kolkata

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

ITA 759/KOL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

Sanganeria Foundations for Health & Education, New Delhi vs. CIT, Exemption, New Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 703/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usa.Yr. : 2017-18 Sanganeria Foundations For Vs. Cit, Exemption Health & Education, New Delhi 304, Avg Bhawan, M-3, Ward Exemption 2(1), Connaught Circus, Civic Centre, New Delhi – 110 001 New Delhi – 110 002 (Pan: Aadts8978E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir Singh, CIT-DR
Section 11(2)Section 11(3)(d)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

Anjana Foundation Vadodara, Vadodara vs. The AO, CPC, Bangalore Present the ITO, Ward Exemption, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal

ITA 695/AHD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Dileep K. Vaidya &
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(iia)Section 250

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

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

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

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

Awaaz Foundation, Mumbai vs. ACIT Trust Circle/CPC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1924/MUM/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1924/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit, Trust Circle/Cpc, Awaaz Foundation, Mtnl Building, Peddar C/O- Sumaira Abdulali, 3, बिधम/ Road, Mumbai-400 026 Reshma Apartment, 13 Pali Vs. Hill Road, Near Petit School, Bandra (W) Mumbai-400 050 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabta8994Q (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. R. Agarwal, Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Sinha, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 03.10.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 26.07.2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Relation To Intimation U/S 143(1) For Ay 2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha, Ld. DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 288

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Exemption) Circle, Aurangabad vs. M/S. the Nanded Sikhgurudwara Sachkhand Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib, Nanded

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2119/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2119/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Exemption Circle, Vs. M/S. The Nanded Aurangabad. Sikhgurudwara Sachkhand Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib, Nanded-431601. Pan : Aabtt2452Q Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Sardar Singh Meena Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Date Of Hearing 26.05.2022 : Date Of Pronouncement : 09.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Aurangabad [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 06.06.2017 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld. Cit(A), Has Erred In Allowing Exemption U/S 10(23C)(V) Of The Act, In The Given Facts Of The Case, Particularly The Assessee Failed To Furnish Audit Report In Form No. 10Bb U/S 10(23C)(V) R.W.R. 16Cc.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

Shri Jagatbharti Education & Charitable Trust, Surendranagar vs. CIT (Exem), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 447/AHD/2018[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 80G(5)

Xr Eductional Trust, Salem vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Salem

The appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3267/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3267/Chny/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Xr Educational Trust The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 364/103C, Narayanan Street, Exemptions Ward, Vs. Peramanur, Salem-636 007. Salem. !थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatx-0098-F (अपीलाथ./Appellant) : (12थ. / Respondent) अपीलाथ.कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S.Sridhar, Advocate 12थ.कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V.Sreenivasan – Ld. Addl. Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 13/10/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 03/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan – Ld. Addl. CIT
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(3)

Gurudwara Kalgidhar Singh Sabha, New Delhi vs. ITO (E) Ward - 1(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee dismissed

ITA 7984/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Kohli, C.AFor Respondent: Date of Hearing : 18.02.2021
Section 10Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 194ISection 69C

Shri Dharmik Ramlila Samiti, Ghaziabad vs. CIT(Examption), Lucknow

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

ITA 5798/DEL/2017[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT/DR
Section 10Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)

Indian Medical Trust vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Andan

In the result, the petitioner-Trust is entitled to the benefit of

CW/6896/2018HC Rajasthan12 Feb 2019
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12

M/S Arulmgu Devi Karumariamman Thirukoil, Chennai vs. CIT (Exemptions), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1090/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Nov 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1090/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Not Applicable M/S Arulmigu Devi Karumariamman The Income Tax Officer Thirukoil, Thiruverkadu, V. (Exemptions), Poonamalle Taluk, Chennai - 600077 Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aadta 3737 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Nataraja, JCIT
Section 10Section 80G(2)(b)Section 92

Mahrashtra Labour Welfare Board, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(2)(4), Mumbai

ITA 1380/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok J. Patil (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal(DR)
Section 10Section 11

The Christia Literature Society, Chennai vs. JCIT (OSD), Chennai

In the result, I set aside the orders of the lower authorities

ITA 2818/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Smt. B. Jaisheila, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. B. Sahadevan, IRS, JCIT
Section 11