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

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.332–355

Section 13(1)(d) 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)(d) is 1. Father Mullers Charitable Institutions 363 IT 230 (Kar.) 2. DIT(E) v. Sheth Mafatlal Gagalbhai Foundation Trust (249 ITR 533), cited in 108 of the 306 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 13(1)(d)

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

Income of a trust that is taxable at the maximum marginal rate should be taxed accordingly, while other income is eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act.

DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse
259 ITR 280 · 2003 · Supreme Court
86
citing judgments

Violation of investment mandates under Section 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a charitable trust results in the complete denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Act.

DIT (Exemption) v. Jasubhai Foundation
374 ITR 315 · 2015 · High Court
45
citing judgments

A charitable trust can claim exemption for specific income streams under Section 10, such as dividend income under Section 10(34), independently of the provisions of Section 11. Income exempted under Section 10 is not restricted or overridden by Section 11 for trusts.

CIT v. Fr, Mullers Charitable Institutions
51 Taxmann.com 378 · 2014 · Supreme Court
39
citing judgments

Income earned from investments or deposits made in violation of Section 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act is taxable, but only to the extent of the income so earned, not the entire corpus. Circular No. 387, dated 06.07.1994, supports this interpretation and binds the revenue authorities.

DIT v. Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram
357 ITR 731 · 2013 · High Court
35
citing judgments

Donations made for a specific purpose are considered capital in nature and cannot be applied for charitable or religious purposes, thus not being deemed income from property for the purposes of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

CIT v. Working Women’s Forum
365 ITR 353 · 2014 · High Court
34
citing judgments

When an exemption is denied under Section 13(1)(c) or (d), the denial of exemption applies only to the portion of income that violates these provisions, not the entire income.

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. ACME Educational Society
326 ITR 146 · 2010 · High Court
32
citing judgments

An interest-free loan provided by one charitable society to another, both registered under Section 12AA and possessing similar objectives, does not contravene Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 11(5) of the Income Tax Act, as such loans are not classified as investments or deposits.

JRD Tata Trust v. DCIT
122 Taxmann.com 275 · 2020 · ITAT
31
citing judgments

Shares held as corpus by a trust, which were a precondition for notification under Section 10(23C), cannot be deemed to forfeit exemption under Section 13(1)(d) and Section 13(2)(h).

M.N. Desai Charitable Trust v. CIT
172 ITR 382 · 1988 · High Court
26
citing judgments
(1) DCIT v. Working Women's Forum
235 Taxmann 516 · 2015 · Supreme Court
25
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 13(1)(d)

Devi Academy, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1054/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1054/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Devi Academy, The Ddit ( Exemptions)-Iii, C/O. Shri T.N. Seetharaman, V. Chennai - 34. Advocate, #384, (Old No.196), Lloyds Road, Chennai – 600 086. Pan: Aaatd 1676M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Muthushankar, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.04.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Chennai In Ita Nos.145/2014-15/Cit(A)-17 Dated 30.01.2019. The Assessment Was Framed By The Ddit (Exemptions)-Iii, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2011-12 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 22.03.2014. I.T.A. No.1054/Chny/2019 2 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regards To The Order Of Cit(A) Confirming The Action Of Ao In Denying Exemption U/S.11 Of The Act To The Assessee’S Trust For The Violation Of Provision Of Section 13(1)(C) Of The Act In Regard To Payment Of Rs.5,00,000/- Dated 27.09.2010 Made To Dr.P.N. Parameswaran, Founder Trustee & Smt. R. Jeyalekhsmy, Permanent Trustee. The Assessee Has Raised Various Interconnected Grounds & Argumentative Grounds Which We Need Not To Reproduce.

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Muthushankar, Addl.CIT
Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)

The DCIT (Exemptions) Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Shree Khodal Dham Trust, Kagwad, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 904/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedअपील सं./Ita No.904/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 D.C.I.T.(Exemptions) Shree Khodal Dham Trust, Circle-2, Vs. Kagwad, Ahmedabad. Alka Society, 4Th Floor, Shri Sardar Patel Bhavan, Near Water Tank, Rajkot-360004. Pan: Aajts1017J

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT.D.R
Section 11Section 12A

Audit Bureau of Circulations, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 6393/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sunil Nahta &For Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 11Section 13Section 13(8)Section 2(15)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

ITA 2162/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 2Section 250

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

ITA 2161/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 2Section 250

Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

ITA 2116/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 2Section 250

Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

ITA 2115/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 2Section 250

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

ITA 1316/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 2Section 250

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

ITA 1314/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 2Section 250

Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Additional Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) Range-II(Now Assessed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

ITA 1302/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 2Section 250

Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Additional Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) Range-II(Now Assessed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue being ITA No

ITA 1301/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 2Section 250

Mrs. Jayanti Dalmia vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-26, New Delhi

ITA/42/2022HC Delhi09 Mar 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN

Section 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)Section 397Section 420Section 471Section 482

Society for Institute of Advanced Management, Kolkata vs. C.I.T.(Exmption), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 357/KOL/2020[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.357/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Society For Institute Of Advanced Management ....….………………….……Appellant C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aaaas5992G] Vs. Cit(Exemption), Kolkata.........…….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raju Lapcha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 17, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 02, 2022 Hearing Through Video Conferencing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Appellant-Society Against The Order Dated 27.02.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Agitating Against The Cancellation Of Registration Granted U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Invited Our Attention To The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Cit(E) Stating That The Same Is An Ex Parte Order. He Has Contended That No Proper Opportunity Was Granted To The Assessee To Present Its Case In Response To The Show-Cause Notice Issued By The Ld. Cit(E). Only The Notice Was Received, However, Due To Unavoidable Circumstances, The Counsel For The Assessee Has Sought Adjournment On That Date. However, Thereafter The Notices Were Served On The Portal Which Did Not Come To The Notice Of The Assessee. The Ld. Counsel Has Further Submitted That The Sole Ground On The Basis Of Registration Of The Appellant-Society Has Been Cancelled Was That Cit(E) Observed That As Per The Balance

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)

Sir Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

ITA 773/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 773/मुं/2021 (िन.व.2016-17) Sir Ratan Tata Trust, Bombay House, 24, Homi Modi Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Pan: Aaats1013P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Cit (Exemptions), Room No.617, 6Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Amol Kirtane, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2021 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 16/02/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Sh. Sukhsagar Syal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amol Kirtane, CIT-DR
Section 11(5)Section 143(3)Section 263

National Academy of Construction, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Hyderabad

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 445/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S.Godara

For Appellant: Shri C.S.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Goutam, DR
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 80G

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1317/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2022AY 2008-09
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 11(5)(xii)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Daivadnya Samjonnati Parishad Mahajanwadi Mandal, Mumbai vs. ITO (E)-1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2631/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman ( & Shripavan Kumar Gadale ()

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 143(2)

M/S. Karnataka Reddy Janasangha, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle- 1, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee and the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2547/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 2(15)Section 234B

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (E) Circle - 1, Bengaluru vs. M/S Karnataka Reddy Janasangha, Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee and the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1507/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 2(15)Section 234B

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (E) Circle-1, Bengaluru vs. M/S Karnataka Reddy Janasangha, Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee and the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1506/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 2(15)Section 234B