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 : ITAT held that delayed filing of Form 10B cannot defeat Section 11 exemption if the audit report is available before processing un...
Income Tax : The Income Tax Department has issued detailed FAQs explaining registration, audit, return filing, investment norms, and tax exempt...
Income Tax : This analysis explains how Parliament designed Sections 11 to 13 to ensure that tax-free income is ultimately used for charitable ...
Income Tax : This analysis explains how charitable and religious trusts qualify for exemption under Sections 11 to 13 of the Income-tax Act. It...
Income Tax : The document highlights situations where exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 can be withdrawn, including benefits provided to inte...
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 held that denial of Section 11 exemption does not bar consideration of deductions under Section 57(iii) after factual ...
Income Tax : Having regard to the gravity of the allegations, the ongoing investigation, the requirement of further probe into digital and fina...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat held that delayed filing of Form 10B is a procedural lapse and remanded the matter after directing the AO to consider t...
Income Tax : ITAT held that CPC could not make adjustments under Section 143(1) without issuing the mandatory prior intimation. The order was q...
Income Tax : The Court held that Section 263 could not be invoked where the AO had raised queries, examined replies and completed the assessmen...
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...
Summary of the Bombay High Court judgment where a charitable trust’s oversight in e-verifying its Form 10B was considered a human error and the delay was condoned, securing its Section 11 income tax exemption for A.Y. 2017-18.
Mumbai ITAT restored Discover Ekam Foundation’s Section 12AB registration matter to the CIT(E). Rejection, based on overseas fund use, will be re-adjudicated considering the trust’s revised Memorandum of Association.
Bombay High Court condones 81-day delay by Institute of Actuaries of India in filing Form 10BB, holding denial of exemption unjust for minor procedural lapse.
The ITAT dismissed an assessee’s quantum appeal, confirming that a ₹10.42 Cr write-off for decommissioned windmills was a capital loss, not a revenue deduction. Since the trust offered this as business income, the ITAT held the only permissible treatment was adjustment in the block of assets.
Description: The Tribunal allowed the appeal of an Exemption-registered society that challenged its reassessment on the legal ground that the AO failed to issue a Section 143(2) notice. The ruling confirms that this notice is mandatory for assumption of jurisdiction under Section 143(3) read with 47, even if the return was filed belatedly.
The ITAT ruled that the Rs. 5.97 crore received by a charitable trust for a cultural event were tax-exempt donations, not business income hit by Section 2(15) proviso. The Tribunal held that TDS deduction or invoice issuance does not change the essential charitable character of the receipt, relying on a binding Delhi High Court judgment.
The ITAT ruled that receipts from the sale of power generated during the pre-commencement trial run of a plant are capital receipts, not taxable revenue income. This is because, under the matching principle, corresponding pre-operative expenses were capitalized to the fixed asset cost, justifying the deletion of the Rs. 42.56 crore tax addition.
NCLT Delhi held that application under section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiation of CIRP against M/s. Universal Journeys India Private Limited [Corporate Debtor] is admitted since existence of operational debt and default duly established.
The ITAT ruled that loose, uncorroborated diaries maintained by a third party are dumb documents and cannot be the sole basis for major tax additions or the denial of Section 11 exemption for a charitable trust. The Tribunal emphasized that suspicion is not a substitute for proof, and denying Section 11 requires concrete evidence of a violation under Section 13.
The ITAT restored the Section 11 exemption, ruling that the Diamond Bourse’s cost-recovery activities are purely facilitative and do not constitute “trade, commerce, or business” under the restrictive proviso to Section 2(15). The Tribunal held that genuine General Public Utility (GPU) organizations operating on a non-profit, cost-recovery basis are not affected by the amendment.
