Section 12 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 12 is Ashok Pai v. CIT (292 ITR 11), cited in 812 of the 2,391 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 12

Ashok Pai v. CIT
292 ITR 11 · 2007 · Supreme Court
812
citing judgments

“Concealment of particulars of income” and “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” are two distinct offences under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. A penalty cannot be levied under one limb if the show cause notice or basis for penalty specifies the other, as this constitutes a complete variance in the reasons for assuming jurisdiction.

CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection
264 ITR 110 · 2003 · High Court
398
citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on assets for which the cost has been fully allowed as an application of income under Section 11 in previous years, when computing the income of a charitable trust. Charitable trusts are also entitled to carry forward their deficit.

ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
143 Taxmann.com 278 · 2022 · Supreme Court
390
citing judgments

If activities for the advancement of general public utility are carried on as a business, income from such activities is not exempt under Section 11, even if the profits are utilized for the main charitable object. The argument that profits from general public utility activities can be ploughed back to charity to maintain exemption is not a good law.

Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association
121 ITR 1 · 1980 · Supreme Court
328
citing judgments

A charitable institution, whose predominant object is general public utility, can engage in non-charitable activities yielding incidental profits, provided these profits are deployed to achieve the dominant charitable object. A subsidiary object, if ancillary to the primary charitable purpose, does not negate the institution's charitable character.

Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT
101 ITR 234 · 1975 · Supreme Court
323
citing judgments

This case defines 'education' under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act as systematic instruction, schooling, or training given to the young for preparation for the work of life. It clarifies that 'education' in this context has a narrow meaning, not extending to every acquisition of further knowledge.

(i) Formula One World Championship Ltd. v. CIT
394 ITR 80 · 2017 · Supreme Court
200
citing judgments

This case provides foundational principles that illuminate the contours of the concept of 'Permanent Establishment' (PE) under tax treaties, especially regarding a 'fixed place' PE.

CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries
201 ITR 325 · 1993 · High Court
195
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the income tax return, as specified in provisions like Section 80J(6A) or 80-IA(7), is directory and not mandatory. Substantial compliance is achieved if the audit report is submitted at any time before the assessment is framed or completed, and benefits should not be denied merely due to a delay in furnishing it.

Income Tax v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS)
131 Taxmann 386 · 2003 · High Court
188
citing judgments

The Income Tax Act, 1961, does not permit the carry forward of excess expenditure of a charitable trust to be set off against future surpluses, as such trusts are governed by a self-contained code under Sections 11 to 13, not the head 'Profits and Gains of Business'. However, depreciation on fixed assets is allowable to a charitable institution registered under section 12A.

CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce
55 ITR 722 · 1965 · Supreme Court
167
citing judgments

An organization qualifies as having a charitable purpose if its primary object is the advancement of general public utility, even if its members receive incidental benefits. The existence of incidental non-charitable objects does not negate its charitable status.

Asea Brown Boveri Limited v. Industrial Finance Corporation of India Ltd.
154 Taxmann 512 · 2006 · Supreme Court
157
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 12

Shree Shree Ramkrishna Samity, Siliguri vs. Centralized Processing Center, Income Tax Department, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 527/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jul 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.527/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2023-2024) Shree Shree Ramkrishna Samity Vs Cpc, It Department, Bengaluru Kiran Chandra Building, Sevoke Rd Siliguri H.O., Siliguri, Darjiling Pan No. : Aacas 9103 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Sabya Sachi Mandal, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Jcit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Gurugram, Dated 27.01.2025 For The Assessment Year 2023-2024. 2. Shri Sabya Sachi Mandal, Ld.Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Ld. Sr.Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Outset, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Has Submitted An Adjournment Application Physically Which Has Not Been Signed. The Said Adjournment Application Has Not Been Sent Through Email Also. Therefore, The Adjournment Application Is Rejected & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Disposed Off. 4. The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income On 14.11.2023. The Form 10B Has Been Filed Along With Return On 14.11.2023. The Due Date For Return Is 13.11.2023. The Intimation U/S.143(1) Of The Act Has Been Issued On 18.11.2024. The Cpc Has Denied The Assessee The Benefit Of Exemption

For Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, JCIT-Sr.DR
Section 11Section 143(1)

Sri Venakteswara Swamy Devastanam, Jamalapuram vs. ITO., Exemption Ward1- (3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1003/HYD/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1002 & 1003/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2016-17) Sri Venkateswara Swamy Vs. Income Tax Officer Devasthanam (Exemption), Ward 1(3) Jamalapuram Hyderabad Pan:Aamts2301Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate E Hari Babu राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothese Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Separate Orders, Both Dated 19/02/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2016-17. 2. There Is A Delay Of 160 Days In Filing The Present Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay. The Learned Ar Of The Assessee Has Submitted That During The Pendency Of The Appeal Before The Learned Cit (A), The Assessee Filed A Writ Petition Before The Hon'Ble High Court For Issuing Directions To The Learned Cit (A) & The Hon'Ble High Court Was Pleased To Give Directions To The Learned Cit (A)

For Appellant: Advocate E Hari BabuFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 11

Sri Venkateswara Swamy Devastanam, Jamalapuram vs. ITO., Exemption Ward-1(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1002/HYD/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1002 & 1003/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2016-17) Sri Venkateswara Swamy Vs. Income Tax Officer Devasthanam (Exemption), Ward 1(3) Jamalapuram Hyderabad Pan:Aamts2301Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate E Hari Babu राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothese Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Separate Orders, Both Dated 19/02/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2016-17. 2. There Is A Delay Of 160 Days In Filing The Present Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay. The Learned Ar Of The Assessee Has Submitted That During The Pendency Of The Appeal Before The Learned Cit (A), The Assessee Filed A Writ Petition Before The Hon'Ble High Court For Issuing Directions To The Learned Cit (A) & The Hon'Ble High Court Was Pleased To Give Directions To The Learned Cit (A)

For Appellant: Advocate E Hari BabuFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 11

Sampark, Sailasree Vihar, Bhubaneswar vs. Commissioner-of-Income Tax(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 133/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: S/ S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) Rl Reddy(Kz) & And Rajesh Kumarita No.133/Ctk/2025 Assessment Year :2023-24 Samprak Vs. Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad At: At: 311/4370, 311/4370, Niladri Niladri Vihar, Vihar, Sailashree Vihar, Vihar, Bhubaneswar 751021 Pan/Gir No. Aaajs 3164 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri : Shri Sanjay Behura & Ananta Narayan Singhbabu Narayan Singhbabu, Ars Re Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/07/202 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/07/202 /2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Com The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (E)), Hyderabad Dated 09/12/2024 In Appeal No.Cit(Exemption),Hyd/2024 Cit(Exemption),Hyd/2024-25/12Aa/11704, Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S. Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S.12Ab 12Ab & Dated 11/12/2024 11/12/2024 In In Appeal Appeal No. No.Cit(Exemption),Hyd/2024 Exemption),Hyd/2024-25/12Aa/11703 Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S. 80G Of The Act, Passed Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S. 80G Of The Act, Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S. 80G Of The Act, For Assessment Year For Assessment Year 2023-24. P A G E 1 | 4 Ita No.133/Ctk/2025 Assessment Year :2023-24

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 80G