Section 11(1A) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.332–355

Section 11(1A) 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(1A) is Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. Deputy CIT (340 ITR 53), cited in 78 of the 71 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 11(1A)

Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. Deputy CIT
340 ITR 53 · 2012 · High Court
78
citing judgments

Failure to fully and truly disclose material facts, for the purpose of reassessment beyond four years, extends beyond the income tax return to omissions during assessment proceedings. Mere disclosure of a transaction does not constitute true and full disclosure if underlying material facts are withheld.

Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
340 ITR 64 · 2012 · Supreme Court
32
citing judgments

An assessee's failure to fully disclose material facts regarding expenses incurred for tax-free income during assessment proceedings can lead to the reopening of assessment, as it constitutes an omission and failure to disclose necessary information for completing the assessment.

CIT v. First
241 ITR 248 · 2000 · High Court
13
citing judgments

Reopening of assessment proceedings based on an audit party's observation is valid, provided there is prima facie material to support the reopening.

CIT v. Highway Construction Co. (P.) Ltd.
217 ITR 234 · 1996 · High Court
11
citing judgments

Investment of income shortfall in a nationalized bank can be treated as application of income for charitable purposes under Section 11(1) and 11(5) of the Income Tax Act, read with the trust's objects.

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. DLF Qutab Enclave Complex Medical Charitable Trust
248 ITR 41 · 2001 · High Court
8
citing judgments
57 of the Act. II. DCIT (E) Bhopal v. Vaishnavi Polyclinic College Governor by VSK Market Tech Educational Society
122 Taxmann.com 287 · 2020 · ITAT
7
citing judgments
3i Infotech Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
192 Taxmann 137 · 2010 · High Court
6
citing judgments
PCIT v. Yes Bank Ltd.
135 Taxmann.com 161 · 2022 · High Court
5
citing judgments
United Christmas Celebrations Committee Charitable Trust v. ITO
80 Taxmann.com 173 · 2017 · High Court
5
citing judgments
Virendra v. Appropriate Authority & Ors.
327 ITR 185 · 2010 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 11(1A)

Shree Harikrushna Velfare Trust, Bhachau vs. The ITO Exemption Ward 1, Rjakot, Rajkot

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

ITA 677/RJT/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 677/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 ] Shree Harikrushna Velfare Trust, The Ito (Exemption) 1 Swaminarayan Gurukul, Ward (1), Rajkot. Vs. National Highway, Bhachau, It Office, New Aayakar Gujarat-370140 Bhawan, Vatiaka, Rajkot, Gujarat-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagts6149E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hinal Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 21.01.2026, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(1) Of The Act, Dated 03.01.2018. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee In Ita No.677/Rjt/2026 For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Barred By Limitation By 30 Days. The Assessee Has Moved A Petition For Condonation Of Delay, Requesting The Bench To Condone The Delay

For Appellant: Shri Hinal Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250