Section 12AA(3) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 12AA(3) is Parshuram Pottery Works Ltd. v. ITO (264 ITR 276), cited in 73 of the 256 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 12AA(3)

Parshuram Pottery Works Ltd. v. ITO
264 ITR 276 · 2003 · High Court
73
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer is bound by the rule of consistency and cannot make a 'U-turn' in their assessment unless the revenue brings contrary facts on record.

CIT v. Max India Ltd.
388 ITR 81 · 2016 · High Court
68
citing judgments
CIT v. Batanagar Education
129 Taxmann.com 30 · 2021 · Supreme Court
39
citing judgments

Cancellation of registration under Sections 12AA and 80G of the Income-tax Act is justified when a trust misuses its status by returning substantial donations in cash to donors.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Chotatingrai Tea & Ors.
258 ITR 529 · 2002 · Supreme Court
30
citing judgments

A donor cannot be held responsible for the utilization of their donation by a donee institution once the statutory conditions for claiming a deduction are met. Subsequent withdrawal of approval for the donee institution cannot retrospectively deny the donor the deduction.

DIT(E) v. Meenakshi Amma Endowment Trust
354 ITR 219 · 2013 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Authorities cannot reject an application for registration under section 12A or recognition under section 80G solely on the ground of absence of activities when the trust has approached for registration within a reasonable time after its formation. The objects of the trust must be examined.

CIT(E), Bangalore v. Ohio University Christ College
408 ITR 352 · 2018 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Application of income for charitable purposes 'in India' is the relevant criterion, not whether the expenditure was incurred within or outside India. If income is applied for charitable activities outside India, it does not automatically mean the charitable activities themselves were conducted outside India.

DIT (Exemption) v. Karnataka Badminton Association
378 ITR 700 · 2015 · High Court
13
citing judgments

Registration under Section 12A cannot be cancelled solely on grounds that were or could have been considered at the time of granting registration. The benefit of Section 12A registration is not available if the assessee's case falls under the first proviso to Section 2(15).

Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax (central)-l, Mumbai
108 Taxmann.com 272 · 2019 · ITAT
12
citing judgments

Violation of Section 13 provisions does not empower the Commissioner to cancel registration under Section 12AA(3); such violations are grounds for forfeiting exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 during assessment.

Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) v. National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM)
21 Taxmann.com 213 · 2012 · High Court
9
citing judgments
CIT(E) v. Maria Social Service Society
408 ITR 462 · High Court
9
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 12AA(3)

Rohilkhand Educational Charitable Trust, Bareilly vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Bareilly

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 181/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.181 & 182/Lkw/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational Vs. Dcit, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly Pan: Aaatr6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. S.H. Usmani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: [ These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Lucknow Dated 19.03.2024 & 22.03.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19, Dismissing The Appeals Of The Assessee Against Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “(1).That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering The Fact That In The Alleged Assessment Order, The Columns Of Name Of Assessee, Pan, Asst Year, Date Of Assessment & Section Under Which Passed, Are Blank. (2)That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating The Demand As Valid Which Was Not Computed On The Basis Of Orderthat May Not Be Termed To Be An Order Under Section 143(3). (3) That A Demand Of Tax As Computed In The Computation Sheet Is Without Jurisdiction Void-Ab-Inito & Is Liable To Be Annulled. (4) That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 736591857/-Comprising  Corpus Donation Aggregating To Rs 7,68,95,000/-, A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)