Section 13(2) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 13(2) is CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne (146 ITR 28), cited in 195 of the 27 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 13(2)

CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne
146 ITR 28 · 1984 · High Court
195
citing judgments

Depreciation claimed by a charitable trust on its assets is an allowable application of income for computing exemption under Section 11, and this does not constitute a double deduction.

Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. Framjee Cawasjee Institute
109 CTR 463 · 1993 · High Court
191
citing judgments

A charitable trust is allowed to claim depreciation on its assets for computing its income, even if the capital expenditure incurred on acquiring those assets was treated as an application of income in the year of acquisition.

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.

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.

CIT v. Raipur Pallottine Society
180 ITR 579 · 1989 · High Court
79
citing judgments

Depreciation is deductible when computing the income of a charitable trust under Section 11, and treating both depreciation and capital expenditure as an application of income for charitable purposes does not amount to a double deduction.

DIT (Exemption) v. Girdharilal Shewnarain Tantia Trust
199 ITR 215 · 1993 · High Court
24
citing judgments
Jaswant Rai v. CWT
107 ITR 477 · 1977 · High Court
18
citing judgments
Association of Corporation & Apex Societies of Handlooms v. ADIT
30 Taxmann.com 22 · 2013 · High Court
7
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 13(2)

DCIT, EXEMPTION , GHAZIABAD vs. MAHARANA PRATAP EDUCATION CENTRE , KANPUR

ITA 2840/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2840/Del/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2013-14

Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

MR. ARPANBHAI VIRAMBHAI DESAI,GANDHINAGAR vs. PR.CIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 758/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D K Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT.DR
Section 12Section 147Section 263

MASINA HOSPITAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. SALIL MISHRA- CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

ITA 3378/MUM/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2026-27

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)Section 186(7)Section 80G

MASINA HOSPITAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, SALIL MISHRA, MUMBAI

ITA 3377/MUM/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2026-27

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)Section 186(7)Section 80G

PRAMILA KATIYAR CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL WELFARE TRUST,NOIDA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4054/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 13(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

R. JAYANNA HUF,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 986/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Raghavendra Chakravarthy, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 54F

M.P. SANTHOSH KUMAR, ITO, CHENNAI vs. GREENPEACE ENVIRONMENT TRUST, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 406/CHNY/2025[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 406/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Greenpeace Environment Trust, Exemptions, Ward-1, Vs. New No.49, Old No.23, Chennai. Ellaiamman Colony, Gopalapuram, Chennai-600 086. [Pan:Aaatg-3538-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Kumar Chandan, Jcit. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am :

For Appellant: Mr. Kumar Chandan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(c)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

DCIT, MUMBAI vs. JAMSETJI TATA TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2058/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Suraiya/Sukhsagar Sayal, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 13(1)

DCIT, KAUTILYA BHAWAN vs. JAMSETJI TATA TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2057/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Suraiya/Sukhsagar Sayal, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12ASection 13(1)

KAMLESH KHANNA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-40(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7841/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv &For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 54

M/S. BARROWS BLUE BELLS SCHOOL,BAHARAICH vs. THE I.T.O. (E), LUCKNOW

Accordingly, the same are being dismissed as having become academic in nature

ITA 362/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 148

M/S. BARROWS BLUE BELLS SCHOOL,BAHARAICH vs. THE I.T.O. (E), LUCKNOW

Accordingly, the same are being dismissed as having become academic in nature

ITA 361/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 148

M/S. BARROWS BLUE BELLS SCHOOL,BAHARAICH vs. THE I.T.O. (E), LUCKNOW

ITA 360/LKW/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 148

HEMKUNT FOUNDATIONS,GURUGRAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) -1, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed and the Stay

ITA 631/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2021-22 & Stay Application No.329Del/2024 ( In Ita No. 631/Del/2024 ) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Hemkunt Foundations, Vs. Principal Commissioner Plot No.809, Second Floor, Income Tax, Rd 42, Sector 42, Central-1, Gurugram, Haryana New Delhi Pin: 122 002 Pan No. Aaath8443C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor, SumitFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Agarwal, Special Counsel and Shivansh Pandya, Jr. Standing
Section 12ASection 133ASection 143(2)Section 80G

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. K J FOUNDATION, BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue for these two assessment years are dismissed

ITA 1327/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Praveena S., CIT (DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: S/Shri Satish Mody, Advocate & Kunjan Gandhi, CA
Section 13(3)

ASPAN ACADEMY NOIDA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 20, NEW DELHI

ITA 330/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12Section 12ASection 13Section 13(2)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153CSection 8

ASPAN ACADEMY NOIDA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 20, NEW DELHI

ITA 329/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12Section 12ASection 13Section 13(2)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153CSection 8

ANTHAYYA EDUCATION FOUNDATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION 1-(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 5001/MUM/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Margav Shukla &For Respondent: Mr. Ram Krishn Kedia, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 142(1)

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SRI CHAITANYA EDUCATIONAL COMMITTE, VIJAYAWADA

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

ITA 325/HYD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)

ITO EXEMPTION 2 4 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. VAIBHAV MEDICAL AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 5494/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhailito (Exemption) – 2(4), Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Mtnl Building, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 ……………. Appellant Maharashtra V/S Vaibhav Medical & Education Foundation, C-1, Aditya Birla Centre, S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli, ……………. Respondent Mumbai - 400030, Maharashtra Pan – Aaatv3207A

For Appellant: S/Shri Ronal Doshi a/w Deep ChouhanFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Heliwal, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(2)(a)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145Section 24

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2