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

Chetna, Sector-C vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Ram Tirath Marg

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 355/LKW/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2019-20 Chetna, Vs Assistant Director Of Income Tax Aliganj, Lucknow Pan: Aaatc1696A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Akshay Agarwal, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.05.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.05.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Addl /Jcit-3 (Appeals) Ahmedabad Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 16.01.2026, Wherein The Ld. First Appellate Authority Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cpc Under Section 154 Of The Act For The A.Y. 2019-20, Passed On 14.02.2024. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Without Considering The Facts Of The Case. 2. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Wrongly Rejected The Exemption U/S 12A Saying That There Was No Valid & Timely Submitted Form 10B & Form No 10 On Record, Even The Form 10B (Audit Report) Was Submitted On 31/10/2019 Within The Prescribed Time & Form 10B (Audit Report) Available On Income Tax Portal. 3. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Has Also Not Given Any Finding About The Calculation Of Tax On Income Over Expenditure As Aop In Case Of Rejection Of Exemption U/S 12A. 4. That The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Against The Law & Principle Of Natural Justice. 1 A.Y. 2019-20 Chetna

For Appellant: Sh. Akshay Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250