Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 12AA is ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (143 Taxmann.com 278), cited in 390 of the 4,243 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 12AA

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.

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.

Queen’s Educational Society v. CIT
372 ITR 699 · 2015 · Supreme Court
152
citing judgments

An educational institution that generates a surplus does not automatically lose its charitable status or cease to exist solely for educational purposes. This is true if the surplus is reinvested for its educational objectives, and the predominant object test determines if the institution's primary aim is education or profit.

Union of India v. Exide Industries
425 ITR 1 · 2020 · Supreme Court
146
citing judgments

The provision for leave encashment is allowable as a deduction only on an actual payment basis under Section 43B(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 43B(f).

Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax
31 ITR 28 · 1957 · Supreme Court
137
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for commercial expediency, even without a direct or immediate benefit but indirectly facilitating business, is deductible as laid out wholly and exclusively for trade. The scope of reference jurisdiction under Section 66 is limited to questions of law, allowing challenges to Tribunal findings of fact only if they are perverse, unreasonable, or lack evidence.

R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT
82 ITR 570 · 1971 · Supreme Court
131
citing judgments

Tax laws must be interpreted reasonably and in consonance with justice, even though equitable considerations are generally irrelevant in their interpretation.

Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. ITO (Exemption)
125 Taxmann.com 75 · 2021 · High Court
129
citing judgments

The filing of Form 10B for claiming exemption under sections 11 and 12 is directory, not mandatory. A delay in filing Form 10B can be condoned, and exemption cannot be denied solely on this ground if the assessee satisfies other conditions and shows sufficient cause.

ACIT v. Surat City Gymkhana
300 ITR 214 · 2008 · Supreme Court
125
citing judgments

Once an institution receives registration under Section 12AA, the Assessing Officer must compute its income as per Section 11, focusing only on the application of income and not re-examining the charitable nature of its activities. The Supreme Court also clarified the meaning and scope of 'general public utility' under Section 2(15).

Judgments on Section 12AA

Debaguru Adarsha Bidyalaya Parichalana Committee, Mugamanda vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 518/CTK/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Dec 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.518 /Ctk/2024 Assessment Year : 2021-22 Debaguru Adarsha Bidyalaya Debaguru Adarsha Bidyalaya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ito Ward, Income Tax Officer, Ito Ward Parichalana Committiee Parichalana Committiee Khorda Mugamanda, Po: Narayanipada, Po: Narayanipada, Ps: Begunia , Khordha, 752062 Khordha, 752062 Pan/Gir No.Aadtd 7196 F Aadtd 7196 F (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Dr Sanjay Kumar Behura & Dr Sanjay Kumar Behura & Ananta Narayan Singhbabu, Advs Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 31/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Against The Order Of The Ld Addl/Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata 4, Kolkata Dated 3.7.2024 In Appeal No.Addl/Jcit(A) 3.7.2024 In Appeal No.Addl/Jcit(A)- 4,Kolkata/10003/220 4,Kolkata/10003/220-2021 For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, Dr Sanjay Kumar Behura and Dr Sanjay Kumar Behura and AnantaFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 250

Annai Velankanni Educational Trust, Tirunelveli vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Tirunelveli, Triunelveli

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

ITA 2185/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2185/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Annai Velankanni Educational Trust, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 262A, Thiruchendur Road, Exemptions Ward, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli. Palayamkottai H.O. Tirunelveli 627 002. [Pan:Aaeta3416A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Raghupathy, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.02.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 129 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Explaining Reasons

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Raghupathy, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 144

Modella Caretaker Centre, Siliguri vs. ACIT(OSD), Ward-2(1), Siliguri

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 300/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.137, 170, 271 & 300/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Modella Caretaker Centre….. ……..……………………....Appellant 27, Church Road, Siliguri-734001. [Pan: Aabtm0003G] Vs. Acit(Osd), Ward-2(1), Siliguri……................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rip Das, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit & Somnath Das, Sr. Drs, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 23, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Pertaining To Four Assessment Years I.E 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013- 14 & 2014-15 Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Arise From Common Set Of Facts Except Difference In Figures & Related To Same Party, Therefore, These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience, Brevity & Clarity. The First Appeal Being

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 40A(2)(a)

Modella Caretaker Centre, Siliguri vs. ACIT(OSD), Ward-2(1), Siliguri

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 271/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.137, 170, 271 & 300/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Modella Caretaker Centre….. ……..……………………....Appellant 27, Church Road, Siliguri-734001. [Pan: Aabtm0003G] Vs. Acit(Osd), Ward-2(1), Siliguri……................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rip Das, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit & Somnath Das, Sr. Drs, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 23, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Pertaining To Four Assessment Years I.E 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013- 14 & 2014-15 Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Arise From Common Set Of Facts Except Difference In Figures & Related To Same Party, Therefore, These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience, Brevity & Clarity. The First Appeal Being

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 40A(2)(a)

Modella Care Taker Centre, Siliguri vs. ACIT(OSD), Ward-2(1), Siliguri

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.137, 170, 271 & 300/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Modella Caretaker Centre….. ……..……………………....Appellant 27, Church Road, Siliguri-734001. [Pan: Aabtm0003G] Vs. Acit(Osd), Ward-2(1), Siliguri……................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rip Das, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit & Somnath Das, Sr. Drs, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 23, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Pertaining To Four Assessment Years I.E 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013- 14 & 2014-15 Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Arise From Common Set Of Facts Except Difference In Figures & Related To Same Party, Therefore, These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience, Brevity & Clarity. The First Appeal Being

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 40A(2)(a)

Modella Caretaker Centre, Siliguri vs. ACIT(OSD), Ward-2(1), Siliguri

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 137/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.137, 170, 271 & 300/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Modella Caretaker Centre….. ……..……………………....Appellant 27, Church Road, Siliguri-734001. [Pan: Aabtm0003G] Vs. Acit(Osd), Ward-2(1), Siliguri……................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rip Das, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit & Somnath Das, Sr. Drs, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 23, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Pertaining To Four Assessment Years I.E 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013- 14 & 2014-15 Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Arise From Common Set Of Facts Except Difference In Figures & Related To Same Party, Therefore, These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience, Brevity & Clarity. The First Appeal Being

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 40A(2)(a)