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

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.332–355

Section 13(1)(c)(ii) falls under section 13 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which 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 13(1)(c)(ii) is Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT (358 ITR 78), cited in 58 of the 74 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 13(1)(c)(ii)

Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT
358 ITR 78 · 2013 · High Court
58
citing judgments
GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption)
360 ITR 138 · 2014 · High Court
51
citing judgments

Charging fees, even when having regard to the economic status of beneficiaries, is permissible for the sustenance of charitable activities, provided it is necessary for operation and running expenses and does not amount to carrying on trade or commerce. This applies even after the introduction of the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Tranvancore Cements Ltd. v. Asst. CIT
305 ITR 170 · 2008 · High Court
37
citing judgments

Once an Assessing Officer forms a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and issues a notice under section 148, they can assess or reassess income related to other issues not originally included in the reasons recorded.

Surat City Gymkhana v. Dy.CIT
254 ITR 733 · 2002 · High Court
37
citing judgments

The burden of proof lies on the Assessing Officer (AO) to establish that a trust or charitable institution is hit by the provisions of Section 13. General allegations or mere transactions with interested persons are insufficient unless concrete benefit is proven.

DIT(E) v. Charanjiv Charitable Trust
43 Taxmann.com 300 · 2014 · High Court
28
citing judgments

A charitable trust can claim depreciation on a capital asset even if its cost was treated as application of income for charitable purposes. Allowing depreciation does not constitute double allowance.

Deputy Director of Income Tax v. All India Football Federation
62 Taxmann.com 362 · 2015 · High Court
27
citing judgments

The proviso to section 2(15) should not be invoked to deny exemption to a sports organization if its activities are not predominantly in the nature of trade, commerce, or business.

Canara Bank Golden Jubilee Staff Welfare Fund v. DCIT
308 ITR 202 · 2009 · High Court
17
citing judgments

The income of a society for mutual benefits of its members is exempt from tax, as demonstrated in this case concerning a cooperative bank.

(i) CIT v. Standing Conference of Public Enterprises (Scope)
319 ITR 179 · 2009 · High Court
16
citing judgments

Income from sources such as fixed deposit interest, dividend income, and profits from the sale of investments are not taxable when they arise from a relationship of mutuality.

CIT v. Bholaram Educational Society
101 Taxmann.com 193 · 2019 · Supreme Court
13
citing judgments

Exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act is not denied to a trust where rent paid to a trustee for property is not excessive, even if the trustee is related to the settlors.

Yashoda Shivappa Nagangoudar v. ITO
138 Taxmann.com 296 · 2022 · High Court
10
citing judgments

A reassessment order is invalid if the Assessing Officer initiates proceedings based on an alleged transaction but makes no addition to income in respect of that specific transaction in the final assessment order. The reassessment order must be based on actual findings, not merely on initial suspicions that are not substantiated.

Judgments on Section 13(1)(c)(ii)

Disha Delphi Education Society C/O- Kalani & Co. Ca, 5Th Floor, Kilestone Building Gandhinagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur vs. Pr. CIT(Central), Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 626/JPR/2019[0]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 626/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :............ Disha Delphi Education Society, Cuke Pr.Cit (Central), 334, Asiad Village, Hauz Khas, Vs. Jaipur. New Delhi-110049. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aaatd 8461 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 313/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year: 2016-17 Disha Delphi Education Society, Cuke Pr.Cit (Central), Vs. 334, Asiad Village, Hauz Khas, Jaipur. New Delhi-110049. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aaatd 8461 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ajay Chandra (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 05/10/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 27/12/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Common Assessee Against The Separate Order Of Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Dated 22/03/2019 & 29/10/2020 For The A.Y. 2016-17 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 2

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 2Section 263