Section 13(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 13(1)(c) is Indian Molasses Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (37 ITR 66), cited in 201 of the 173 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 13(1)(c)

Indian Molasses Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
37 ITR 66 · 1959 · Supreme Court
201
citing judgments

Expenditure is defined as money paid out or away, which is gone irretrievably. To be deductible under Section 37(1), expenditure must be wholly and exclusively for business, not capital or personal, and not fall under specific provisions of Sections 30 to 36, often justifiable on grounds of commercial expediency.

CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona
402 ITR 441 · 2018 · Supreme Court
187
citing judgments

The amendment related to claiming depreciation for charitable trusts under Section 11(6) is prospectively applicable. This means depreciation on the opening balance of fixed assets cannot be denied if their cost was previously claimed as an application of income.

CIT v. Tiny Tots Education Society
330 ITR 21 · 2011 · High Court
112
citing judgments

Charitable institutions are entitled to claim depreciation on assets even when the cost of acquisition has already been treated as an application of income for exemption purposes, as this does not constitute a double deduction.

1. Father Mullers Charitable Institutions 363 IT 230 (Kar.) 2. DIT(E) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust
249 ITR 533 · 2001 · High Court
108
citing judgments

When a charitable trust violates investment provisions under Sections 11(5) or 13(1)(d), or applies income for prohibited purposes under Section 13(1)(c), the denial of exemption under Section 11 and taxation under Section 164(2) applies only to the extent of such violation or diversion, not to the entire income of the trust.

CIT v. Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust
198 ITR 598 · 1992 · High Court
98
citing judgments

When computing the income of a charitable trust for exemption under Section 11, depreciation must be allowed as an application of income based on commercial principles. This does not constitute a double deduction.

AGARWAL WAREHOUSING AND LEASING LTD. v. CIT
257 ITR 235 · 2002 · High Court
96
citing judgments

Orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal are binding on all revenue authorities, including the Assessing Officer and Commissioner (Appeals), functioning under its jurisdiction. Judicial discipline requires subordinate authorities to follow these orders unreservedly, and failure to do so constitutes judicial impropriety and an error in law.

U.P.Pollution Control Board v. Kanoria Industrial Limited
2 SCC 549 · 2001 · Reported
69
citing judgments

The right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution includes the fundamental right to shelter, encompassing adequate living space, safe structures, clean surroundings, and essential amenities.

M/s Safdurjung Enclave Educational Society v. Municipal Corporation Delhi
3 SCC 390 · 1992 · Reported
49
citing judgments

Activities carried out on commercial lines can still fall within the ambit of 'charitable objects' for the purpose of income tax exemptions, provided they align with the definition of charitable purpose.

CIT v. Indian National Theatre Trust
305 ITR 149 · 2008 · High Court
45
citing judgments

A loan advanced by a charitable trust to another charitable trust can be treated as an application of income for the purpose of availing exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act.

Tamil Nadu Cricket Association v. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)
360 ITR 633 · 2014 · High Court
40
citing judgments

Violation of the conditions under Section 13 of the Income Tax Act does not automatically lead to the conclusion that the activities of a trust are not in accordance with its objects. The revenue must demonstrate that the dominant activities are in the nature of trade, commerce, or business, not merely based on the volume of receipts.

Judgments on Section 13(1)(c)

ELECTRIC LAMP AND COMPONENT MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the appellant society is allowed

ITA 4309/DEL/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalelectric Lamp & Component Cit (Exemption) Manufacturers Association Of Delhi. India, Vs. (Civic Centre Minto Road, C/O Kapil Goel, Adv. Delhi-110002). G-8/5 Sector-11, Opposite Sfs Apartment, Rohini, Delhi-110085. Pan-Aaate0234A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv. Department By Shri Jitender Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) Dated 30.06.2025 Passed U/S 12Ab(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ In Short) Rejecting The Registration Applied By The Assessee U/S 12A Of The Act For The Period From Assessment Years 2021-22 To 2025-26. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Society Was Incorporated On 29.06.1970 & Registered U/S 12A Of The Act In Terms Of Registration Certificate Issued On 30.09.1986. Thereafter, Assessment For Assessment Years 2013-14 & Electric Lamp & Component Manufacturers Association Of India Vs. Ito 2015-16 Were Completed On 29.03.2016 & 11.12.2017 Respectively, Wherein Assessee Was Allowed Exemption U/S 12A Of The Act. The Assessee Was Granted Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Act For Assessment Year 2021-12 To 2023-24 Vide Order Dated 27.05.2021, Thereafter, Assessee Applied For Permanent Approval U/S 12A Which Was Rejected By Ld. Cit(E) Vide Order Dated 30.06.2025 & Further Cancel The Provisional Registration Granted From Assessment Year Onwards.

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

Showing 120 of 173 · Page 1 of 9

...