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 ITAT Ahmedabad cancelled the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) after setting aside the assessment for fresh adjudication, holding that penalty based on the original order cannot survive once the assessment itself is reopened.
The Tribunal ruled that a bona fide technical mistake in selecting the wrong section code while applying for registration cannot lead to rejection of the application. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Exemption) for reconsideration on merits.
Hriday Vs ITO (Exemption) (Delhi High Court) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, decided a batch of five appeals filed by a charitable society registered under Section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Years (AYs) 2010–11 to 2014–15. The appeals challenged a common order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) […]
The Tribunal found that the authority misapplied the law by relying on provisions relating to donor deductions rather than approval conditions for institutions. Since the trust fulfilled statutory requirements, the rejection of approval was set aside.
The tribunal held that exemption for a statutory housing authority depends on whether housing units were sold above cost. The case was remanded to examine if charges exceeded cost plus nominal mark-up.
The Court held that rejection of condonation for a 50-day delay in filing Form 10B was improper when genuine hardship was demonstrated. It directed authorities to treat the audit report as filed within time and process the return accordingly.
The Tribunal ruled that exemption under Sections 11 and 12 cannot be denied by aggregating separate shareholdings to invoke Section 13(2)(e). It held that no office bearer individually held substantial interest, making the addition unsustainable.
The High Court dismissed Revenue appeals after holding that the assessee’s activities were charitable in nature, making it eligible for exemption under Section 11. The ruling followed the Supreme Court’s precedent and settled multiple connected tax issues.
The Tribunal held that actuarially valued provisions mandated by law constitute application of income under Section 11 and cannot be disallowed merely due to absence of cash outflow.
The Tribunal directed the AO to grant exemption after the High Court condoned delay in filing Form 10B. It held that denial of relief due to technical lapse was unjustified.
