Section 10AB of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 10AB is Mahaveer Prasad Jain v. CIT (172 ITR 331), cited in 48 of the 190 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 10AB

Mahaveer Prasad Jain v. CIT
172 ITR 331 · 1988 · High Court
48
citing judgments

A litigant should not be made to suffer adverse consequences solely due to the bona fide mistake or negligence of their counsel, and they must be provided a fair and proper opportunity to present their case on its merits.

Self Employers Institution v. CIT
247 ITR 18 · 2001 · High Court
47
citing judgments

The Commissioner is justified in rejecting an application for registration or recognition (e.g., under sections 12A, 12AA, or 80G) if there is no material to establish the genuineness of the trust's activities or if no charitable work has been undertaken during the relevant period.

Fifth Generation Education Society v. CIT
185 ITR 634 · 1990 · High Court
44
citing judgments

Registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G are distinct from assessment; issues relevant to assessing income under Section 11 cannot be grounds for rejecting an application for registration or approval.

Nagaraj & Others v. State of Karnataka & Another
4 SCC 595 · 1994 · High Court
43
citing judgments

Substantial justice must prevail over mere procedural technicalities, and rules of procedure or technicalities of law should not obstruct the course of justice. Courts, especially higher courts, can rectify orders passed under a mistake or erroneous assumption, guided by equity and fairness.

CIT, 172 ITR 331(MP), Concord India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi
181 ITR 183 · High Court
33
citing judgments

A party cannot be made to suffer for the mistake of their counsel. This principle is applied to condone delays in filing appeals when the delay is attributable to the counsel's error.

Aurora Educational Society v. CCIT
20 Taxmann.com 46 · 2012 · Reported
31
citing judgments

The scope and amplitude of Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income-tax Act and its applicable provisos, rules, and forms are the subject of examination in relation to applications for approval.

Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT
93 Taxmann 645 · 1997 · Supreme Court
25
citing judgments

An institution or fund is deemed to be one to which section 80G applies even if it incurs expenditure of a religious nature not exceeding five per cent. of its total income, overriding Explanation 3 to section 80G(5)(ii).

Mattel Toys India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
34 Taxmann.com 203 · 2013 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

An assessee is not barred from deviating from a method applied in its own transfer pricing study for the current year if the facts of the case warrant the adoption of other methods to determine the arm's length price of international transactions.

Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council v. 6th ITO
68 ITD 95 · 1999 · ITAT
18
citing judgments

Expenses incurred outside India for promotional activities benefit the entire trade in India, thus satisfying the requirement for application of income for charitable purposes within India, even if the expenditure occurs abroad.

Jamsetji Tata Trust v. Jt. DIT (Exemption)
148 ITD 388 · 2014 · ITAT
14
citing judgments

An education grant given to Indian students for studying abroad fulfills the conditions for application of money to claim exemption under Section 11, even if the final execution of the purpose occurs outside India. This does not constitute a violation of Section 11(1)(c) or an application of funds outside India.

Judgments on Section 10AB

Swodharak Vidyarthi Sanstha, Dhule vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Nashik

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

ITA 2445/PUN/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2445/Pun/2024 Swodharak Vidyarthi Sanstha, Vs. Cit, Exemption, Pune. Shindkhed, Malpur, B.O. Karle- 425408. Pan : Aayts6120K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad Shah Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing 13.01.2025 : Date Of Pronouncement 15.01.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.10.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit, Exemption, Pune Rejecting The Application For Approval U/S 80G Of The It Act. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld. Cit-E Erred In Denying The Registration U/S 80G Of The It Act. 2. The Ld. Cit-E Ought To Have Ignored The Clerical Error While Filing The Form 10Ab (While Selecting The Relevant Clause) & Thereby Ought To Have Considered The Application To Be Valid & Granted The Registration U/S 80G Of The It Act. 3. The Appellant Craves Its Right To Add To Or Alter The Grounds Of Appeal At Any Time Before Or During The Course Of Hearing Of The Case.” 3. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are, That The Assessee Is A Trust Filed Its Application For Registration In Form No.10Ab Under Clause (Ii)

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 80GSection 80G(5)