Which cases are most cited on Section 11(5)?

1. Father Mullers Charitable Institutions 363 IT 230 (Kar.) 2. DIT(E) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust (249 ITR 533) — 108 citing judgments; Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nizam's Suppl. Religious Endowment Trust (127 ITR 378) — 87 citing judgments; Trust (249 ITR 533) (Bom.) 3. CIT vs. Red Rose School (163 Taxman 19 (All.) 4. DIT(E) v. Alarippu ( (172 ITR 698) — 61 citing judgments; Dy. CIT v. Zuari Estate Development and Investment Co. Ltd. (373 ITR 661) — 61 citing judgments; Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT (358 ITR 78) — 58 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 11(5)?

BharatTax indexes 145 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 11(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 11(5) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 11(5) is 1. Father Mullers Charitable Institutions 363 IT 230 (Kar.) 2. DIT(E) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust (249 ITR 533), cited in 108 of the 145 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 11(5)

1. Father Mullers Charitable Institutions 363 IT 230 (Kar.) 2. DIT(E) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust

249 ITR 533 · 2001 · High Court

108

citing judgments

When a charitable trust violates investment provisions under Sections 11(5) or 13(1)(d), or applies income for prohibited purposes under Section 13(1)(c), the denial of exemption under Section 11 and taxation under Section 164(2) applies only to the extent of such violation or diversion, not to the entire income of the trust.

Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nizam's Suppl. Religious Endowment Trust

127 ITR 378 · 1981 · High Court

citing judgments

Income of a charitable trust, other than from a business undertaking covered by Section 11(4), is determined based on its books of account. Payments of income tax and wealth tax by the trust are considered an application of income for charitable purposes under Section 11.

Trust (249 ITR 533) (Bom.) 3. CIT vs. Red Rose School (163 Taxman 19 (All.) 4. DIT(E) v. Alarippu (

172 ITR 698 · 1988 · High Court

citing judgments

For a charitable trust to claim application of income under Section 11(1)(a) by donating to another trust, the donee trust must be registered. Donations to unregistered institutions do not constitute an application of income for the donor trust, even if intended for the donee's corpus.

Dy. CIT v. Zuari Estate Development and Investment Co. Ltd.

373 ITR 661 · 2015 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Reopening of assessment beyond four years under Section 147 requires strict satisfaction of conditions precedent, including fresh tangible material, and cannot be based on a mere change of opinion from the original assessment. Further, debatable or interpretational issues cannot be adjusted during processing under Section 143(1).

Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT

358 ITR 78 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

ACIT v. A.L.N. Rao Charitable Trust

216 ITR 697 · 1995 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The exemption for income accumulated under section 11(1)(a) (presently 15%) is absolute, and section 11(2) does not restrict its operation or require such accumulated income to be invested in specified securities. Investment requirements under section 11(2) apply only to accumulation beyond this absolute exemption limit.

Bombay in Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. v. CIT

93 Taxmann.com 63 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot make a prima facie adjustment to the total income under Section 143(1)(a) if the adjustment involves a debatable issue.

GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption)

360 ITR 138 · 2014 · High Court

citing judgments

Earning income or charging fees for activities that serve general public utility does not automatically constitute trade, commerce, or business to attract the proviso to Section 2(15), thus not disentitling an entity from charitable exemptions. The mere receipt of fees for public utility services, without a profit motive, does not negate the charitable nature of the activity.

Delhi Stock Exchange Association Limited v. CIT

41 ITR 495 · 1961 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Entrance fees and one-time membership fees received by an association from new members are classified as revenue receipts for the purpose of income tax assessment.

DIT (Exemption) v. Jasubhai Foundation

374 ITR 315 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

A charitable trust can claim exemption for specific income streams under Section 10, such as dividend income under Section 10(34), independently of the provisions of Section 11. Income exempted under Section 10 is not restricted or overridden by Section 11 for trusts.

Judgments on Section 11(5)

SHREE TARDEO JAIN SWETAMBER MURTI PUJAK,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 2(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 5923/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankarshree Tardeo Jain Swetamber Vs Income Tax Officer (E) Ward 2(3), Murti Pujak Sangh Mumbai 8/E/72, Sonawwala Building, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Tardeo, Mumbai-400007 Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020 Pan:Aaets6368M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dharan Gandhi & Vinita Nara Respondent By : Shri Priyanka Mashilkar (Sr.Ar) Date Of Hearing : 25/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/04/2026 O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (Jm): The Instant Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [For Brevity The “Ld. Cit(A)”], Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (For Brevity ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2018-19, Date Of Order 21.07.2025. The Impugned Order Emanated From The Order Of The National E- Assessment Centre, Delhi (For Brevity The ‘Ld. Ao’) Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Date Of Order 19.04.2021. 2 Shree Tardeo Jain Swetamber Murti Pujak Sangh 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Trust & During The Assessment Year The Assessee Filed The Return Along With Form No.10. Since The Assessee Is Registered Trust & Eligible For Deduction U/Sec. 11 Of The Act The Computation Of Income Available For Accumulation Is As Follows: Sr. No. Particulars Amount(Rs.) A. Gross Receipts 94,21,849/- B. Less: 15% Benefit U/Sec. 11(1)(A) (14,13,277/-) C. Less: Application Of Income For Purpose Of (29,43,668/-) Trust(Accepted By Ld. Ao) D. Net Receipt Available For Accumulation 50,64,903/-

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi & Vinita NaraFor Respondent: Shri Priyanka Mashilkar (Sr.AR)

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

SAHYADRI ADIVASI BAHUVIDH SEVA SANGH ,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION , THANE

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

ITA 2466/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Sahyadri Adivasi Bahuvidh Income Tax Officer, Seva Sangh Exemption, Savarkar Road, Opp. S.T Mumbai Johns High School. Vs. Thane (West), Mumbai - 400601 (Pan: Aadts9375D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Suhas P. Bora, Ca Revenue : Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Addl./Jcit (A)-2, Surat, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1072463266(1), Dated 23.01.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Thane, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 25.12.2018, For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. Bora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. DR

Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

INCOMETAX OFFICER, CUTTACK vs. SISHU KALYAN SAMITY SCB, SCB MEDICAL COLLGE CAMPUS,

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 522/CTK/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2020-21 Ito, Cuttack Sishu Kalyan Samity Scb Vs Cuttack Sadar, Cuttack, Odisha-753007. (Pan: Aaets1542H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P. R. Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. DR

Section 11(5)

SHANTI DEVI JAIN MEMORIAL TRUST,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD EXEMPTION , GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1293/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Years: 2013-14

Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 80G

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, YAMUNANAGAR vs. M/S THE VED PARKASH MUKAND LAL, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

ITA 833/CHANDI/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

DCIT vs. M/S THE VED PARKASH MUKAND LAL, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

ITA 832/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

THE VED PRAKASH MUKAND LAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,YAMUNANAGAR vs. DCIT, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

ITA 825/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

THE VED PRAKASH MUKAND LAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,YAMUNANAGAR vs. DCIT, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

ITA 824/CHANDI/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

POWERLOOM DEVELOPMENT & EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL ,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEM), WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7767/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri S.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25Section 250

POWERLOOM DEVELOPMENT & EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7766/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri S.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25Section 250

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

ITA 1670/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

INCOMETAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS WARD, TIRUNELVELI vs. THE CHRISTIAN BUSINESSMEN EDUCATIONAL FELLOWSHIP, KOVILPATTI

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

ITA 2395/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2395/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer, The Christian Businessmen Exemptions Ward Vs. Educational Fellowship, Nellai City Centre, Rahmath Nagar, No.46, Alwar Street, Tiruchendur Road, Kovilpatti, Tirunelvali, Tamil Nadu-628501 Tamil Nadu-627011 [Pan: Aacat2359N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Sivakumar, Addl.Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.R. Viswanthan, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026

For Appellant: Mr.C.Sivakumar, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Mr.R. Viswanthan, CA

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80G

HOLY CROSS CHURCH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 5515/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti B. Patel a/w Shri M.A. GoelFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 143(1)Section 250

RAMKRISHNA BAJAJ CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 26(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 6544/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv. & MrFor Respondent: Assessee by

Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 35ASection 80

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)

AJARA PARSHWANATHJI PANCHTITHI JAIN KARKHANA PEDHI,GUJARAT vs. ITO EXEMPTION, WD 2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 475/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri G.R. Sanghvi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 11(5)Section 143(3)

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, MUMBAI

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

ITA 5987/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailnational Institute Of Construction Management & Research, Walchand Centre, Walchand Terraces, Tardeo Road, Ac Market ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400034 Pan : Aaatn1348J V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle - 2, ……………… Respondent Cumbala Hill, Telephone Exchange, Peddar Road, Mumbai - 400026

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram, CIT-DR

Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xii)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST, THIRUVALLUR

ITA 234/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita. Nos.:234, 235, 236 & 237/Chny/2025 & Co Nos.59, 60, 61 & 62/Chny/2025 (In Ita Nos. 234, 235, 236 & 237/Chny/2025) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Deputy Commissioner Of Jaya Educational Trust, Income Tax, Vs. No.8, Krishnapuram, Ii Main Road, Central Circle -1(2), Thiruninravur, Chennai. Thiruvallur – 602 024. [Pan:Aaatj-0369-D] (अपीलाथ#/Appellant) ($%थ#/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. Department By : Shri. Bipin C.N., C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri. Y. Sridhar, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N., C.I.T

Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 250Section 40A(3)

PRABODH CENTRE FOR RURAL REFORMS,PUNE vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated herein above

ITA 1225/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1225/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Prabodh Centre For Rural Reforms, Vs. Cit (Exemption), Gat No.143, Village Bhukum, Pune Tal. Mulshi, Pune 411042 Maharashtra Pan : Aadtp6064A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 11(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 92(2)

KALYANI GORAKSHAN TRUST,SATARA, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

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

ITA 559/PUN/2025[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Nov 2025AY 2025-2026

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Showing 1–20 of 145 · Page 1 of 8

...