Which cases are most cited on Section 12A(1)(ac)?

Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT (56 ITR 365) — 42 citing judgments; Oxford Academy for Career Development v. Chief CIT (315 ITR 382) — 37 citing judgments; Neelam Cable Manufacturing Co. v. ACIT (63 ITD 1) — 29 citing judgments; DIT (Exemption) v. Khar Gymkhana (385 ITR 162) — 27 citing judgments; 1109 (Ahmedabad-Trib.), Gandhinagar Ayyapa Pooja Samiti v. CIT(E) (170 Taxmann.com 797) — 20 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 12A(1)(ac)?

BharatTax indexes 537 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act?

Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT (56 ITR 365) is the decision most relied on for Section 12A(1)(ac), cited in 42 judgments. An appellate authority has the jurisdiction to admit additional evidence if it is necessary for a complete and effective adjudication of the matter.

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.332–355

Section 12A(1)(ac) falls under section 12A 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 12A(1)(ac) is Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT (56 ITR 365), cited in 42 of the 537 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)

Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT

56 ITR 365 · 1965 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

An appellate authority has the jurisdiction to admit additional evidence if it is necessary for a complete and effective adjudication of the matter.

Oxford Academy for Career Development v. Chief CIT

315 ITR 382 · 2009 · High Court

citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) has no power to cancel registration granted under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act retrospectively, especially when there is no express provision in the Act for such cancellation and the order is quasi-judicial in nature.

Neelam Cable Manufacturing Co. v. ACIT

63 ITD 1 · 1997 · ITAT

citing judgments

Expenses incurred for services rendered in relation to a let-out property are deductible when computing the annual value of the property under Section 23 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

DIT (Exemption) v. Khar Gymkhana

385 ITR 162 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

The cancellation of registration under section 12AA(3) is limited to circumstances specified in the section. Income and application of funds issues are matters of assessment, not grounds for cancellation under section 12AA(3).

1109 (Ahmedabad-Trib.), Gandhinagar Ayyapa Pooja Samiti v. CIT(E)

170 Taxmann.com 797 · 2025 · Reported

citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) cannot reject an application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) solely on technical grounds without considering the genuineness of the trust's activities.

Mohammed Ibrahim Riza v. CIT

65 ITR 611 · 1967 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A trust or institution is considered a valid charity if its primary or dominant purpose is charitable, even if it has other non-charitable objects that are merely ancillary or incidental to the main charitable purpose.

Director of Income-tax (Exemptions), Mumbai v. Shri Vile Parle Kelavani Mandal

58 Taxmann.com 288 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

Depreciation claimed on an asset acquired from trust income is not a double deduction. It is a permissible deduction representing the use of the asset, distinct from the earlier claim towards application of funds for acquisition.

Aatman Foundation v. CIT(E)

174 Taxmann.com 1109 · 2025 · Reported

citing judgments

Mhalasakant Deosthan Mandir v. CIT

172 Taxmann.com 284 · 2025 · Reported

citing judgments

Vananchal Kelavani Trust v. CIT(Exemption)

159 Taxmann.com 634 · 2024 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)

Quality Education Foundation, Alipur Road, Opp to Zambare Ganesh Temple vs. Income Tax Officer Exeption Ward 1, Pmt Building Shankar Shet Road Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1718/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1718 & 1719/Pun/2025 Quality Education Foundation, Vs. Cit, Exemption, Pune. 841, Alipur Road, Zambare Ganesh Mandira Samor, Shivaji Nagar, Barshi- 413411. Pan : Aaaaq0714C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Umesh Mali Revenue By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 18.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit, Exemption, Pune Rejecting The Application For Registration In Form No.10Ab Under Clause (Iii) Of Section 12A(1)(Ac) Of The It Act Filed On 08.06.2024 & Denying The Application For Approval In Form No.10Ab Under Clause (Iii) Of First Proviso To Sub-Section (5) Of Section 80G Of The It Act Filed On 09.06.2024. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of Both The Appeals. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeals Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Ld. Dr, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals.

For Appellant: Shri Umesh MaliFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Matushri Lilbai Maganlal Gala Charitable Trust, Thane vs. DCIT (Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 1134/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandramatushri Lilbai Maganlal Gala Cit(Exemption), Pune Charitable Trust Gala No.315, Building No.R3, Vs. Samarth Chs, Kharton Road, Opp. Dadoji Konddev Stadium, Thane (West) – 400601 Pan: Aadtm4064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh S Athavale (Virtually) Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 07-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24-10-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S Athavale (virtually)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

Nishkam Shewa Mandal, Ahmedabad vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1051/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1051/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : N.A.

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

Psr Sustainability Foundation, Pune vs. CIT(E), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1921/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Respondent: Appellant by None

Section 12ASection 5Section 80G

Psr Sustainability Foundation, Pune vs. CIT(E), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1920/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Respondent: Appellant by None

Section 12ASection 5Section 80G

Navkar Ashish Seva Trust, Nashik vs. CIT(E), Pune

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

ITA 933/PUN/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.933/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2025-26 Navkar Ashish Seva Trust, V The Cit(E), 22, Cidco, Racca Colony, S Pune. Sharanpur Road, Maharashtra – 422002. Pan: Aactn6605L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Chinmayy Suhas Pathak Revenue By Shri Aditya Shukla – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Under Section 12A(1)(Ac) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 17.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit-(E), Pune Has Erred In Rejecting Application Of The Appellant Trust Filed U/S 12A(1)(Ac)(Ii) Of The Act Without Appreciating That The Said Action Was Not Justified On Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(E) Failed To Appreciate The Clerical Error Committed In Selecting Appropriate Head In Drop Down List Provided In E-Filing Portal

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

Shri Balasaheb Wagh Welfare Foundation, Niphad vs. CIT Exemption Pune, Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 682/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Shukla

Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80Section 80G

Shri Balasaheb Wagh Welfare Foundation, Niphad vs. CIT Exemption Pune, Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 681/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Shukla

Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80Section 80G

Give Artisans Trust, Kolhapur vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 337/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

NA vs. Amaj Nirman Bahu Uddeshiy Sanstha, Nandurbarvs.ITO, Exemption Ward- 1(2), Nashik

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1350/PUN/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

For Appellant: Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 36ASection 80G

NA vs. Amaj Nirman Bahu Uddeshiy Sanstha, Nandurbarvs.ITO, Exemption Ward- 1(2), Nashik

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1349/PUN/2025[2025-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2025-06

For Appellant: Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 36ASection 80G

Chitrakar Deepak R. Patil Art Amd Culture Foundation, Raigad vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1292/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya M Vaishampayan (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Chitrakar Deepak R. Patil Art Amd Culture Foundation, Raigad vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1291/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya M Vaishampayan (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Dhennath Kal Bharav Prasanna Foundation, Pune vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 2620/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Bhikha Behram Well Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT(Exemption), Mumbai

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 5029/MUM/2025[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: N.A.

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Nara, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri. Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

B S Rai Education Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 3516/MUM/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Years: 2025-26 & Assessment Years: 2025-26 M/S. Bs Rai Education Trust, Cit (Exemptions), 201, Neera Govind, Room No.601, 6Th Floor, Govind Nagar, Cumballa Hill Mtnl Te S.N. Road, Building, Vs. Mumbai – 400 080 Pedder Road, Pan: Aabtb6348K Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai – 400 026 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Ganesh Kevat, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: These Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Even Dated 21.03.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2025-26. 2. Both The Appeals Are Interconnected & Having Involved Almost Identical Issues & Therefore For The Sake Of Brevity The Same Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This M/S. Bs Rai Education Trust Composite Order By Taking Into Consideration The Facts & Circumstances & Issue Involved In Ita No.3497/M/2025 As A Lead Case & Result Of The Same Would Be Applicable Mutatis Mutandis To Both The Appeals Under Consideration.

For Appellant: Shri Ganesh Kevat, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. D.R

Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

B S Rai Education Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 3497/MUM/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

For Appellant: Shri Ganesh Kevat, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. D.R

Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Shree Atma Kalyan Jan Seva Society, Thane, Maharashtra vs. CIT (Exemptions), Pune, Maharashtra

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

ITA 567/PUN/2025[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2025AY 2025-2026

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.567 & 566/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: - Shree Atma Kalyan Jan Seva V The Cit(Exemptions), Society, S. Pune. 101, Narmada Jyoti, B P Road, Bijayander East, Thane - 401105 Pan: Aaras3766R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Amit Bobde – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S.12A R.W.S 12Ab & 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As „The Act‟) Both Dated 18.12.2024 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being

Section 12Section 12ASection 80G(5)

Shree Atma Kalyan Jan Seva Society, Thane, Maharashtra vs. CIT (Exemptions), Pune, Maharashtra

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

ITA 566/PUN/2025[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2025AY 2025-2026

Section 12Section 12ASection 80G(5)

Jai Bhavani Gramvikas Bahuueshiya Sevabhavi Sanstha, Nanded vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption Pune, Pune

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

ITA 931/PUN/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.931/Pun/2025 Jai Bhavani Gramvikas Vs. Cit, Exemption, Pune. Bahuueshiya Sevabhavi Sanstha, At Post Sanghavi Benak, Tq. Mukhed, Dist. Nanded- 431716. Pan : Aaatj9445J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit, Exemption, Pune Rejecting The Application For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The It Act. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)