Section 11(7) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.332–355

Section 11(7) 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.

34 judgments on BharatTax turn on Section 11(7).

Judgments on Section 11(7)

Sunil Tibrewal Foundation, Bhiwandi, Thane vs. CIT (Exemptions), Pune

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

ITA 3520/MUM/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Anushree GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 10Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Ncdex Investor (Client) Protection Fund Trust, Mumbai vs. The CIT (Exem), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1917/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm The Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Exemptions) Ncdex Investor (Client) Room No.601, 6Th Floor, Protection Fund Trust 1St Floor, Akruti Corporate Park, Cumballa Hill, Lbs Marg, Near Ge Garden, Mtnl Te Building, Vs. Kanjur Marg (W), Pedder Road, Mumbai-400 078 Dr. Gopalrao Deshkukh Marg, Mumbai-400 026 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtn7481R Assessee By : Shri Abdulkadir Jawadwala, Ar Revenue By : Shri S Srinivasu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023

For Appellant: Shri Abdulkadir Jawadwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR

Section 10Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 263

ITO (Exemption)- 2(1), Mumbai vs. Ncdex Investor (Client) Protection Fund Trust), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned AO and the cross objections of the assessee for all the three assessment years (all three appeals and the cross objections) are dismissed

ITA 856/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Ved, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 143(1)

ITO (Exemption)- 2(1), Mumbai vs. Ncdex Investor (Client) Protection Fund Trust), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned AO and the cross objections of the assessee for all the three assessment years (all three appeals and the cross objections) are dismissed

ITA 855/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Ved, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 143(1)

ITO (Exemption)- 2(1), Mumbai vs. Ncdex Investor (Client) Protection Fund Trust), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned AO and the cross objections of the assessee for all the three assessment years (all three appeals and the cross objections) are dismissed

ITA 854/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Ved, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 143(1)

Itw India Gratuity Fund, Gurgaon, Haryana vs. ACIT, Exemption Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 105/HYD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2014-15 Itw India Gratuity Fund, Vs. A.C.I.T. Exemption Gurgaon, Haryana Ward-1(1) Pan:Aaati5254L Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Surya Kiran Motamarri, Ca Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/03/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Aop Is An Approved Gratuity Fund Trust Recognized By The Commissioner Of Income Tax. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income In Form Itr- 7 By Mentioning That Its Income Is Exempt U/S. 10(23C) (Iv) & That It Erroneously Mentioned In The Tax Return That It Was Granted Registration Under Section 12A. The Books Of Accounts Were Audited As Per The Normal Accounting Practice. Even In The Itr 7 Filed By The Assessee, It Was Erroneously Mentioned That Page 1 Of 6

For Appellant: Shri Surya Kiran Motamarri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

Section 10Section 10(25)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

Indian Institute of Banking and Finance (Formerly Known As the Indian Institute of Bankers), Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2910/MUM/2022[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Selvamani

Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)

Software Technology Parks of India, New Delhi vs. CIT(E), New Delhi

Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 6748/DEL/2017[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryasstt.Yr: _2017-18

Section 10Section 10oSection 11Section 11(7)Section 12A

P.K.Abdul Khader & Brothers vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

ITR/3/2021HC Kerala06 Dec 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

Section 12(2)Section 25Section 6Section 6(2)Section 8

Association of State Road Transport Undertakings, New Delhi vs. ADIT (E), New Delhi

Accordingly the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 1952/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri K.A Manu, Sr.D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)

Ramkrishna Bajaj Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015-

ITA 2226/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ramkrishna Bajaj Charitable The Income Tax Officer Trust, (Exemption) – 2 (2), Bajaj Bhawan, 2Nd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Vs. Lalbaug, Parel, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaatr1693Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.A.Gohel (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Manpreet Singh Duggal, Salil Mishra, O. Tharian, H.N. Singh (Drs) Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/11/2020

For Appellant: Shri M.A.Gohel (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manpreet Singh Duggal, Salil

Section 10Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(7)Section 143Section 2Section 3Section 4

Ganapathi Jana Seva Bhander, Kolkata vs. I.T.O.(Exemption) Ward 1(1), Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1442/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri S. S. Godara] आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.1442/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Ganapathi Jana Seva Bhandar Vs. Ito(Exemption), Ward-1(1), Kolkata 31, Shakespeare Sarani, 4Th Floor, Room No.405A & B, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatg2294E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Parash Nath Keshari, Fca Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11/11/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 25, Kolkata Order Dated 25.04.2019 Passed In Case No.121/Cit(A)-25/Kol/2015-16 Involving Proceedings U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Grievance In The Instant Appeal Is That Both The Lower Authorities Have Erred In Law As Well Facts In Disallowing Section 10(34) Exemption In Respect Of Dividend Received Amounting To Rs.10,57,484/-. Learned Counsel’S Case During The Hearing Is That The Impugned Exemption Has Been Wrongly Denied To The Taxpayer. The Revenue’S Case On The Other Hand Rests On Section 11(7) Of The Act Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Parash Nath Keshari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(34)Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 154

Nemi Chand Jain Educational Society, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 2(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 7018/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 May 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(7)

Kasthuri Sreenivasan Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1913/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. R. Bhavya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A.B. Koli, IRS, JCTI

Section 10(35)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11ASection 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)