Section 12 of Income Tax Act, 1961
Income Tax : Courts held that prior exemption claims under Sections 11 and 12 cannot justify denial of 80G approval. The key takeaway is that b...
Income Tax : Understand the taxability, registration, and exemption provisions for charitable and religious trusts under Sections 11–13, incl...
Income Tax : A summary of the tax framework governing charitable entities in India, covering the definition of 'charitable purpose,' mandatory ...
Income Tax : Does the Finance Act, 2025, extend 12AB registration from 5 to 10 years for trusts under Rs. 5 Cr? See if sma...
Goods and Services Tax : An analysis of GST treatment on post-supply price revisions for exports with IGST payments. Learn about debit and credit notes, in...
Income Tax : The Tribunal condoned a 60-day delay after accepting explanations relating to migration of the ITAT portal and the death of a fami...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court held that grants disbursed by a statutory corporation formed part of its core business functions and qualified a...
Income Tax : PCIT had erroneously mixed up the scope of renewal proceedings with cancellation proceedings under Section 12AB(4). Further, Settl...
Custom Duty : For export transactions occurring before the Finance Act, 2022 amendment, the determination of iron ore fines (Fe content) must be...
Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT held that no further profits can be attributed to a DAPE once the Indian agent is remunerated at arm’s length for al...
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Dehradun, quashed the retrospective cancellation of the charitable trust registration (Sec 12A/12AB) of Sushila Devi Centre. The Tribunal held that the PCIT (Central), Kanpur, acted without jurisdiction, asserting that only the CBDT-notified CIT (Exemption) possessed the authority to cancel such registrations under section 120.
ITAT holds that filing audit report late due to Covid-19 is a procedural lapse, not a ground to deny exemption, following Telangana and Gujarat High Court rulings.
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.
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.
The ITAT ruled that loss from trading in foreign currency derivatives on a recognized exchange is non-speculative business loss, eligible for set-off under Section 43(5)(d). The Tribunal held that such transactions are covered by the exception for derivatives and rejected the lower authorities’ mechanical disallowance.
NCLT Chennai directs initiation of liquidation proceedings under section 33 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code of the Corporate Debtor due to failure of implementing the resolution plan. Thus, the present application is allowed.
ITAT Pune dismissed Revenue’s appeal against Mukund Bhavan Trust, confirming its Sections 11 & 12 exemption. It ruled Sections 13(1)(b) & 13(1)(c) restrictions don’t apply to pre-1961 trusts with protected founding conditions.
Supreme Court held that the Successful Resolution Applicant [SRA] cannot be forced to deal with claims that are not a part of the Request for Resolution Plan [RfRP] issued in terms of Section 25 of the IBC or a part of its Resolution Plan.
The Bombay High Court set aside an order denying Vesava Koli Samaj Shikshan Sanstha’s request to condone a 181-day delay in filing Form 10B for AY 2019-20, citing genuine cause.
