Income received from a charitable/religious trust will be tax-exempt under Section 11, provided that the activity being performed is incidental to the attainment of objectives set by the trust/institution, and separate books of account are maintained by the particular trust/institution pertaining to the business. In this article, we look at some of the major exemptions provided under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.
Income Tax : The Finance Bill 2025 introduces amendments for trust registration, extending validity to 10 years for certain trusts and clarifyi...
Income Tax : Understand the audit requirements for trusts under Form 10B/10BB, including due dates, filing process, clauses, and key difference...
Income Tax : New Application for Condonation of Delay in Filing Forms 9A, 10, 10B, and 10BB Post 18th November 2024 as per Circular No. 16/2024...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi upholds CIT(E) order in ITO Vs Mehta Charitable Prajanalaya Trust, disallowing unrelated expenses and clarifying deduct...
Income Tax : AQs on charitable trusts, covering registration under Section 12AB, income tax rules, donation management, audit requirements, and...
Income Tax : Dive into Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 2302 to understand the tax exemption status of BCCI, potential changes, and insights in...
CA, CS, CMA : ICAI clarified that application of funds can only be made on actual payment basis in case of charitable trusts. This amendment is ...
Income Tax : These instructions are guidelines to help the taxpayers for filling the particulars in CSV template in Part-B Details of donors an...
Income Tax : CA Shailesh R Ghedia president of BJP Professional Cell, Mumbai has written a letter to Honorable Finance Minister, Smt. Nirmala S...
CA, CS, CMA, Income Tax : We have not noticed any heed being extended towards various issues and possible solutions we have proposed through those represent...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai restores rejection of Sports Unlimited Foundation's 12AB and 80G registration over foreign expenditure concerns, direc...
Income Tax : The bench stated that Tribunal after concluding that the BCCI's Appeal before it “was not maintainable”, exceeded its jurisdic...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that accumulation under section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act is to be allowed at 15% of gross receipts. Accordin...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune rules that the tax department cannot deny exemption under Section 11 for non-filing of the original 12A certificate when...
Income Tax : M.M. Patel Charitable Trust Vs PCIT (Central) (ITAT Pune) In a significant ruling, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Pune h...
Income Tax : CBDT extends deadline for trusts and institutions to submit audit reports in Form 10B/10BB until November 10, 2024....
Income Tax : NOTIFICATION NO. 03/2016 Exercise of option etc under section 11. (1) The option to be exercised in accordance with the provisions...
Income Tax : Part III of the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) (Part I - 08.07.2015) for making application for claim of tax exemption u/s 11(...
Income Tax : Many NGOs and Charitable Organizations in India have expressed desire to support relief and rehabilitation work for the benefit of...
Corporate Law : Section 11 of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 – Development Commissioner – Rescission of all previous notifications appoi...
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble High Court have given observations on the issue of unstamped arbitration agreement. It has been held that an arbitration agreement, which is unstamped, does not exist and an unstamped contract, containing an arbitration agreement, would not exist as it has no existence in law and it has been observed that such agreement would be impounded under Section 33 of the Stamp Act.
The Hon’ble High Court observed that for refusal of Registration under Section 11 of the Trademarks Act, it would have to be shown that the marks themselves are confusingly similar to each other, and that, owing to the similarity in the marks and the goods and services which they cover, there is a likelihood of confusion among the public, or a likelihood of the public believing the existence of an association between the marks.
A detailed analysis of CESTAT Bangalore’s ruling in favor of Nexteer Automotive India over the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax. Learn why the show-cause notices were quashed.
Analysis of the CESTAT Chennai order in Axon Drugs (P) Ltd Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise case. Discover why directing excise refund to Consumer Welfare Fund was deemed unjust.
This article delves into the fundamental aspects of not-for-profit companies elucidating their purpose, key features, authorized activities, benefits, and their distinctive role in promoting social welfare. By examining recent legislative developments and exploring the core attributes of not-for-profit companies, this article aims to shed light on their significance in the broader societal context.
CESTAT Chennai held that penalty u/s 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 imposable as CHA has abetted or facilitated, may be deliberate or negligent, an illegal attempted export of prohibited goods i.e. Red Sanders wood pillars and tops.
Assessing Officer’s claims on the irregularity of additional salary payments are unfounded, says ITAT. When payments are made via cheque and duly recorded, there’s no reason to treat them as ‘outside the books.’ The assessee provided evidence that these are year-end calculations, not fictitious transactions. The additional salaries are legitimate and shouldn’t be interpolated for 12 months.
ITAT Bangalore remanded the matter back to AO for fresh consideration as assessee didn’t proved existence of business exigency in making payment in cash and AO didn’t carried necessary enquiry before making addition u/s 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Jaipur held that assessee trust under the umbrella of Dayanand Saraswati University, Ajmer is genuinely performing its activities and objects of imparting education to the students coming off from poor or middle class families. Accordingly, denial to register the trust u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act unjustified.
ITAT referred to SC’s judgment in CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation, Poona, which stated that an entity could claim both depreciation and application of income on asset in its purchase year.
