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

Yakub Baig Trust, Panvel vs. Income Tax Officer, Nec, Delhi

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

ITA 2961/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2961/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Yakub Baig Trust बिधम/ Ito, Nec 853, Mominpada, Mahatma Delhi. Vs. Gandhi Road, Pavel, Maharashhtra-410206. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatm6810A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Aditya M. Rai (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 21.09.2022 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. None Appeared For The Assessee Trust. However, On Perusal Of The Ground No. 1, Which Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Not Granting Enough Opportunity To The Assessee & Having Passed The Ex- Parte Order Qua Assessee. 3. Brief Facts Are That The Assessee Is A Trust Which Enjoys Registration U/S 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) & The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Complete Security Through Cass To Examine “Sale Of High Value Property As Per Information Received In Sft-012 By An Entity Registered U/S 12Aa Of The”. According To The Ao, The Assessee Had Sold Immovable Property Worth Rs.54,38,000/- On 29.05.2017 & Have Not Utilized This Funds

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai (Sr. AR)
Section 11Section 12A

Kalinga Institute of Social Scinces(Kiss), Patia vs. CIT (Exemption)- Hyderabad, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 47/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack19 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.47/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Kalinga Institute Of Social Sciences Vs Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad At (Kiss), Bhubaneswar Plot No.582/1540, Kiit Campus-10 Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Aaaak 7721 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla & S.K.Hota, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(E), Hyderabad At Bhubaneswar, Dated 14.03.2022, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021-22/1040706357(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Is A Trust, Who Is Enjoying The Benefit Of Registration U/S.12A & 80G Of The Act. It Was Submitted That The Assessee Had Received Corpus Donations From M/S Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Technology (Kiit) In The Form Of Incurrence Of Capital Expenditure Of Rs.21,65,00,000/- & An Amount Of Rs.25,00,000/- From Container Corporation Of India (Cci). It Was Submitted That As Per The Mou Between The Assessee & Container Corporation Of India, The Container Corporation Of India Has Provided

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla & S.K.Hota, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 263