Section 12A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.332–355

Section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (264 ITR 110), cited in 398 of the 6,064 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 12A

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.

Exide Industries Ltd. v. Union of India
292 ITR 470 · 2007 · High Court
320
citing judgments

The Calcutta High Court held that restricting deduction for leave encashment via Section 43B(f) was arbitrary and contrary to Supreme Court decisions. However, this judgment was later stayed by the Supreme Court.

Escorts Ltd. v. UOI
199 ITR 43 · 1993 · Supreme Court
267
citing judgments

A statute should not be construed to permit double deduction for the same expenditure unless specifically provided by law.

1. AIR 1951 SC 467: HARLA v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN. 2
2 SCC 453 · 1997 · Reported
222
citing judgments

When an appeal or revision is filed against an order passed by a subordinate forum, and a superior forum modifies, reverses, or affirms that decision, the order of the subordinate forum merges into the superior forum's decision, which then becomes the sole operative and enforceable order.

CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal
211 ITR 293 · 1995 · High Court
204
citing judgments

A charitable trust can carry forward its excess expenditure from previous years and adjust it against the income of subsequent years, which qualifies as an application of income under Section 11. Additionally, voluntary contributions received for a specific purpose are treated as corpus funds and are not taxable.

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.

CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne
146 ITR 28 · 1984 · High Court
195
citing judgments

Depreciation claimed by a charitable trust on its assets is an allowable application of income for computing exemption under Section 11, and this does not constitute a double deduction.

Judgments on Section 12A

Cheruvathur Foundation, Kochi vs. ACIT, Exemption Circle, Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1063/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2014-15 Cheruvathur Foundation .......... Appellant Hig 5, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aabtc0724E] Vs. Acit (Exemptions), Kochi .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Veni Raj, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-4, Chennai, Dated 23.10.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Charitable Trust Found With The Object Of Imparting Education. It Is Duly Registered U/S. 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). The Appellant Trust Filed Return Of Income For 2014-15 On 31.03.2015 Disclosing Nil Income After Claiming Exemption U/S. 11 Of The Act. In 2 Cheruvathur Foundation The Return Of Income The Appellant Claimed The Amount Spent On Acquisition Of Fixed Assets & Repayment Of Loans To Bank As Application Of Income. The Said Return Of Income Was Processed By The Cpc Vide Intimation Dated 16.03.2016 By Making Adjustment Of The Cost Of Fixed Assets Of Rs. 1,25,20.205/- & Repayment Of Loans Of Rs. 4,68,87,408/- By Not Allowing As Application Of Income. Being Aggrieved By The Said Intimation, An Application U/S. 154 Of The Act Was Filed Before The Cpc. The Intimation Was Amended By Allowing The Cost Of Asset As An Application Of Income & Confirmed The Adjustment Of Repayment Of Loan Of Rs. 4,68,87,408/- & Also Not Allowed Carry Forward Of Excess Amount Spent In Earlier Years.

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Veni Raj, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

DCIT Exemptions Circle 1(1), Kolkata vs. B P Poddar Foundation for Education, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 637/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.637/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year. : 2022-2023) Dcit Exemptions Circle-1(1), Vs B P Poddar Foundation For Education, Kolkata 18, Poddar Court, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aaatb 5418 M (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiayn, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 18/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 23.12.2024, Passed By The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-9, Mumbai For A.Y.2022- 2023. 2. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Delayed By 26 Days For Which The Revenue Has Filed The Necessary Condonation Petition. The Reasons Given Are Plausible & Same Are Accepted. Accordingly, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 4. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld.Ar Has Filed His Written Submission Which Read As Under :- Before The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata "A" Bench. Kolkata.

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiayn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)