Section 11(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.332–355

Section 11(1)(d) falls under section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to sections 332 to 355 of the Income-tax Act, 2025, the provisions on registered non-profit organisations.

Read the 2025 provisions

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

The decision most relied on for Section 11(1)(d) is Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona (89 Taxmann.com 127), cited in 130 of the 272 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 11(1)(d)

Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona
89 Taxmann.com 127 · 2018 · Supreme Court
130
citing judgments

The claim of depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act for assets used by charitable trusts is permissible, affirming the Bombay High Court's view that such a claim does not amount to a 'double benefit'.

Dewanchand Builders and Contractors v. Union of India
1 SCC 101 · 2012 · Reported
82
citing judgments

The true test to determine the character of a levy is the primary object and essential purpose intended to be achieved by it.

Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) v. DGIT (Exemptions)
358 ITR 91 · 2013 · High Court
80
citing judgments

An institution carrying out charitable objects, such as education or advancement of general public utility, does not lose its Section 11 exemption merely by collecting fees for activities like campus placements or educational guidance, as this does not constitute carrying on a business.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
268 ITR 128 · 2004 · High Court
65
citing judgments

Revision under Section 263 requires an assessment order to be both erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. It is not permissible if the Assessing Officer adopted a legally permissible view, one of two possible views, or applied mind to the issues, despite the Commissioner's differing opinion or perceived inadequate enquiry.

Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT
358 ITR 78 · 2013 · High Court
58
citing judgments
GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption)
360 ITR 138 · 2014 · High Court
51
citing judgments

Charging fees, even when having regard to the economic status of beneficiaries, is permissible for the sustenance of charitable activities, provided it is necessary for operation and running expenses and does not amount to carrying on trade or commerce. This applies even after the introduction of the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

CIT v. National Association of Software & Services Companies
345 ITR 362 · 2012 · High Court
40
citing judgments

A one-time fee paid by members, with the understanding that it can only be used for capital purposes, is considered a corpus donation and is not taxable as income. This is especially true when separate fees are collected for services rendered.

DIT v. Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram
357 ITR 731 · 2013 · High Court
35
citing judgments

Donations made for a specific purpose are considered capital in nature and cannot be applied for charitable or religious purposes, thus not being deemed income from property for the purposes of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

CIT v. Nirbheram Deluram
91 Taxmann 181 · 1997 · Supreme Court
35
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) can make enhancements to an assessment during appellate proceedings, provided such enhancements do not amount to introducing an entirely new head of income.

Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd, Madras v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras
6 SCC 117 · 1997 · Supreme Court
34
citing judgments

Interest earned on investments made from the principal amount of a fund, even if the principal itself was not brought to tax, can be brought to tax.

Judgments on Section 11(1)(d)

Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Exemption, Ward 1(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1516/DEL/2026[2012 - 2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2026

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: AAATI3600C
Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

ACIT, Central Circle, Karnal vs. Maharishi Markandeshwar Trust, Ambala City

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6850/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: AACTM0573G
Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

Sanskruti Vistarak Sangh, Mumbai vs. D/ACIT Exemption Circle-2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 5139/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Mr. Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Hon’Ble Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 250(4)Section 263

Sanskruti Vistarak Sangh, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Exemption) Circle-2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 5138/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Mr. Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Hon’Ble Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 250(4)Section 263

Tripura Cricket Association, Chowmuhani Agartala Tripura West vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Exempt

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 90/GTY/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: P. Sikdar, ARFor Respondent: M.C. Omi Mingshen, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Msme Technology Centre, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Vijayawada

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

ITA 607/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Aug 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: AAIAM8026D
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(iia)Section 234A

DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Bse Investors Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2009-10,

ITA 8890/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: AAATT3258P
Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(b)

DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Bse Investors Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2009-10,

ITA 8889/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: AAATT3258P
Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(b)

DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Bse Investors Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2009-10,

ITA 8888/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: AAATT3258P
Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(b)

DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Bse Investors Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2009-10,

ITA 7630/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: AAATT3258P
Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(b)

DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Bse Investors Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2009-10,

ITA 7629/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: AAATT3258P
Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(b)

DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Bse Investors Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2009-10,

ITA 7628/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: AAATT3258P
Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(b)

Mewar University, Chittorgarh vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Ward, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 518/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur11 Aug 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blemewar University Income Tax Officer Exemption Gangrar, Chittorgarh-312001 Ward Pan No. Aabam 1197 Q Udaipur Assessee By None Revenue By Prerna Choudhary, Addl. Cit-Dr (Physical) Date Of Hearing 11 / 08 / 2026. Date Of Pronouncement 11 / 08 / 2026. Order Per Bench: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 06.10.2023 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. Though Various Grounds Have Been Raised In The Memorandum Of Appeal, The Only Issue Which Survives For Our Adjudication Is The Denial Of Exemption In Respect Of Corpus Contribution Of ₹26,50,000, Which Has Been Sustained By The Learned Cit(A).

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

Shakuntala Devi Chandra Kumar Munot Charitable Trust, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 3430/Del/2026 is allowed

ITA 3430/DEL/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandrashakuntala Devi Chandra Vs. Income Tax Officer Kumar Munot Charitable Ward Exemption 1(2) Trust Delhi – 110 002 272/2, Masjid Moth, Andrews Gang, Shahpur Jat, New Delhi Pan No. Aaxts 0174 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By -None- Revenue By Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.08.2026

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(iia)Section 234BSection 80G

Sri Venkateswara Swamyvari Devastanam Gosamrakshana Pathakam Trust, Eluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Eluru

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 458/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: AAITS5712M
Section 11(1)(d)Section 250

ACIT(E), Lucknow vs. M/S Babu Yuvraj Singh Sewa Sanasthan, Fatehpur

The appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 263/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Jul 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit (Exemptions) V. M/S Babu Yuvraj Singh Sewa Lucknow Sansthan Nai Bazar, Khaga Fatehpur (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aaaag2972N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. Respondent By: Shri Ashish Bansal, Advocate O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kumar, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Bansal, Advocate
Section 10Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

Malhotra Weikfield Foundation, Pune vs. Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune

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

ITA 900/PUN/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2017-18 Malhotra Weikfield Foundation, Income Tax Officer, 3A, 3Rd Floor, Exemption Ward-1(2), Vascon Weikfield Chambers, Pune Nagar Road, Satpal Malhotra Marg, Vs. Dukirkline S.O. Pune, Pune – 411 014 Maharashtra Pan: Aactm5797L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Neelesh Khandelwal & Ms. Diksha Agarwal Department By : Ms. Bhavya Date Of Hearing : 23-06-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-06-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda:-

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh Khandelwal and Ms. Diksha AgarwalFor Respondent: Ms. Bhavya
Section 11(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 270ASection 274Section 80G

Arvr Education Society, Delhi vs. ITO(Exemptions), Ward-1(1), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5300/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14 Arvr Education Society, Vs. Income Tax Officer A-60 Basement, (Exemption), Malviya Nagar, South Delhi, Ward-1(1), Delhi - 110017 New Delhi Pan: Aacaa7736N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Saubhagya Agarwal, Adv. Sh. Rajkumar, Adv. Department By Ms. Amisha S Gupt, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 27.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22.05.2026

Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(24)(iia)Section 68

Sri Shanmukhananda Fine Arts & Sangeetha Sabha, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle 2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 320/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Us By The Learned Counsel Is That While Adjudicating The Grounds Relating To Disallowance Of Depreciation Under Section 11(6), Addition On Account Of Corpus Donations Under Section 11(1)(D) Read With Section 11(5) & Denial Of Deemed Application Under Explanation 2 To Section 11(1), The Learned Cit(A) Has Proceeded On Facts & Observations Which, According To The Assessee, Neither Emanate From The Assessment Order Nor From The Submissions Actually Advanced Before The Authorities Below. It Has Been Vehemently Submitted That Several Findings Recorded By The Learned Cit(A) Refer To Factual Aspects, Paragraphs & Contentions Which Are Alien To The Assessee’S Case And, Therefore, The Entire Adjudication On These Issues Stands Vitiated On Account Of Consideration Of Incorrect & Non-Germane Facts.

Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 11(5)Section 11(6)Section 143(3)

ACIT(Exemptions), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Shri Khodal Dham Trust Kagvad, Rajkot

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

ITA 2330/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 13Section 80G