This compilation indexes twelve rulings — spanning Income Tax Appellate Tribunal benches and High Courts across India — in which Section 13(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was cited as a provision under consideration. The cases range from 2018 to 2026 and involve a variety of entities including trade associations, charitable societies, improvement trusts, urban development authorities, and private parties. The compilation is intended for use by in-house tax teams, law firm researchers, and Big-4 associates who need a structured starting point for jurisdictional and section-level research.

Disclaimer: This page is a structured research index, not legal or tax advice. All entries are derived from source data in the TaxNoticeAI corpus. Readers must independently verify rulings against full judgments, check for subsequent stays or reversals, and consult qualified advisors before acting on any information contained herein.

The statutory framework in one paragraph

Section 13(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 forms part of the broader set of provisions (Sections 11–13) that govern the conditions under which income of charitable or religious trusts and institutions is entitled to exemption. Section 13 specifies circumstances in which the exemptions otherwise available under Section 11 and Section 12 shall not apply — for instance, where income or property of the trust is applied for the benefit of specified persons, or where the trust's purposes cease to be charitable within the meaning of Section 2(15). Sub-section (8), introduced by the Finance Act, 2022 with effect from a notified date, addresses the interaction between the exemption regime applicable to trusts and institutions and the alternative tax regime, providing that certain provisions of the Act shall not apply to assessees who are eligible for and claim exemption under Sections 11 and 12. The precise scope and application of Section 13(8) has been the subject of litigation before multiple ITAT benches and High Courts, as reflected in the rulings indexed below.

The 12 rulings

1. Federation Of Hotel & Restaurant vs ITO Ward Exemp. 2(3), Delhi

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Date: 29 June 2026
Sections engaged: 2(15), 11, 13(8)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal was filed before the Delhi Bench of the ITAT and is registered as ITA No.5237 & 5238/DEL/2025 covering assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 (PAN: AAACF0904B). Per the source preview, the Assessing Officer noted from the income and expenditure account that the assessee — a federation representing hotel and restaurant associations across India — had received annual subscription from members, raising questions about the nature of its activities and income in the context of the exemption provisions. The substantive determination on sections engaged is not further detailed in the available preview.

2. M/S. Junior Chamber vs ITO, Exemption Ward, Ranchi

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ranchi
Date: 7 April 2025
Sections engaged: 12A, 13(8)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal (ITA No. 33/Ran/2024) was directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 24/11/2023 for Assessment Year 2015-16 (PAN: AAAAJ5916B). Per the source preview, the Tribunal noted a delay of 36 days in filing the appeal, for which the appellant filed a condonation of delay application; the merits of the substantive grounds were not further elaborated in the available preview.

3. Mesers Improvement Trust, Fazilka vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar
Date: 20 September 2023
Sections engaged: 11, 13(8), 2(15)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal (ITA No. 307/Asr/2018) pertains to Assessment Year 2014-15 (PAN: AAALI0094G). Per the source preview, the assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s confirmation of an addition made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of an original audit report, contending that a revised audit report had subsequently been filed reflecting the correct state of affairs and that the addition was therefore unjustified and ought to be deleted.

4. M/S.Sri International vs M/S.Central Bank Of India

Bench: Madras High Court
Date: 12 April 2023
Sections engaged: 13(2), 13(4), 13(8)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The matter was taken up before the Madras High Court as W.P.Nos.32958 & 32016 of 2022. Per the source preview, the writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash an order dated 24.11.2022 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai in RA.(SA).No.17 of 2022, and to set aside a sale held on 04.09.2020; the petition appears to be primarily concerned with proceedings under debt recovery law, with the cited sections appearing in the context of the case record.

5. Ajmer Development Authority, Ajmer vs CIT(Exemption)/ ITO (Exemption)

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jodhpur
Date: 22 March 2023
Sections engaged: 2(15), 13(8)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal (ITA No.89/Jodh/2022) along with Stay Application No.03/Jodh/2023 was filed by the assessee (PAN: AAALS0528D) challenging the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the CIT(Exemptions) for Assessment Year 2012-13. Per the source preview, the appeal and stay application were taken up together and decided by a consolidated order; the merits of the exemption claim and the application of the sections engaged are not further elaborated in the available preview.

6. WP(C)/27/2021 vs Unspecified respondent

Bench: Gauhati High Court
Date: 28 July 2021
Sections engaged: 13(8), 13(2)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The matter was taken up before the Gauhati High Court as WP(C) No.27 of 2021 and was heard through video conferencing. Per the source preview, the petitioners included Shri Pratul Kumar Ghosh (proprietor of J.P. Advertiser) and J.P. Advertiser, with respondents including individuals and branches of Bank of India; the substantive grounds and the determination on the sections engaged are not further elaborated in the available preview.

7. M/S Haridarshan Jewellers Through vs Authorized Officer, Union Bank Of India

Bench: Gujarat High Court
Date: 19 February 2021
Sections engaged: 13(8)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The matter arose as a Civil Application (for vacating interim relief) in R/Special Civil Application No.1083 of 2021 before the Gujarat High Court. Per the source preview, the original petitioners had challenged action taken by Union Bank of India under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act); the Bank applied to vacate ad-interim relief granted by the Court vide order dated 20.01.2021, contending that the petitioners had availed financial assistance of Rs.10.50 crores and had not disclosed correct facts.

8. The Principal Commissioner Of Income vs Surat Urban Development

Bench: Gujarat High Court
Date: 21 September 2020
Sections engaged: 2(15), 11, 13(8)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The Revenue filed this appeal (R/Tax Appeal No. 220 of 2020) under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before the Gujarat High Court challenging the order dated 16.1.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Ahmedabad in ITA No.2431/AHD/2017 for AY 2011-12. Per the source preview, the respondent-assessee (Surat Urban Development Authority) had filed its return of income for AY 2011-12 declaring total income as NIL, and on assessment under the Act the Assessing Officer raised a demand; the Revenue's appeal to the High Court challenges the Tribunal's order on the exemption claim.

9. The Commissioner Of Income vs Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority

Bench: Gujarat High Court
Date: 21 September 2020
Sections engaged: 11, 13(8), 2(15)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The Revenue filed this appeal (R/Tax Appeal No. 214 of 2020) under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before the Gujarat High Court challenging the order dated 16.12.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, Ahmedabad in ITA No.978/AHD/2017 for AY 2012-13. Per the source preview, the respondent-assessee (Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority) had filed its return of income for AY 2012-13 declaring total income as NIL; on assessment, the Assessing Officer assessed the total income at Rs.198,48,79,000/-, which was the subject of the chain of appeals culminating in the Revenue's challenge before the High Court.

10. M/S.Avvai Village Welfare Society vs The Income Tax Officer

Bench: Madras High Court
Date: 10 September 2020
Sections engaged: 13(2)(c), 2(15), 13(8)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The Tax Case Appeals (T.C.A.Nos.495 & 496 of 2019) were filed before the Madras High Court under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the assessee — a Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 (PAN: AAATA3067H) — challenging the common order dated 08.10.2018 made in ITA No.09/Chny/2017 and ITA No.36/Chny/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2012-13. The substantive determination on the sections engaged is not further elaborated in the available preview.

11. The Director Of Income Tax vs India Heritage Foundation

Bench: Karnataka High Court
Date: 18 August 2020
Sections engaged: 13(8)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The Revenue filed this appeal (ITA No.382 of 2012) before the Karnataka High Court under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arising out of the order dated 29.06.2012 passed in ITA No.146/Bang/2012 for Assessment Year 2009-10, praying to formulate substantial questions of law and to set aside the ITAT Bangalore's order while confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner. Per the source preview, the appeal pertained to the exemption claim of India Heritage Foundation and had been admitted by the High Court; the substantive determination is not further elaborated in the available preview.

12. M/S Concern Readymix vs The Authorised Officer

Bench: Telangana High Court
Date: 31 December 2018
Sections engaged: 13(8), 17
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The matter came before the Telangana High Court as Writ Petition No.20729 of 2018. Per the source preview, the petitioners (M/s Concern Readymix and its proprietor) challenged action taken by the Authorised Officer of Corporation Bank; the petition appears to concern enforcement proceedings by the bank, with the cited sections appearing in the case record. The substantive determination on the sections engaged is not further elaborated in the available preview.

Patterns across these 12 rulings

Urban and statutory bodies as recurring litigants. Multiple cases in this compilation — including those involving Surat Urban Development Authority (case 8), Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (case 9), Ajmer Development Authority (case 5), and Mesers Improvement Trust Fazilka (case 3) — involve statutory or government-linked bodies contesting the denial of exemption. This suggests that the interaction of Section 13(8) with the broader exemption framework is a live issue for quasi-governmental entities claiming charitable or public purpose status.
Concurrent citation of Sections 2(15), 11, and 13(8). Across cases 1, 3, 5, 8, and 9, all three of Sections 2(15), 11, and 13(8) are cited together. This co-occurrence indicates that disputes frequently require simultaneous examination of whether an entity's purpose qualifies as "charitable" under Section 2(15), whether the Section 11 exemption is available, and the application of Section 13(8) in that context.
Section 13(8) appearing in non-income-tax proceedings. In several cases (cases 4, 6, 7, and 12), the proceedings appear to originate from debt recovery or SARFAESI-related writ petitions before High Courts, yet Section 13(8) appears in the cited sections list. Researchers should examine the full judgments carefully to determine whether the section citation is substantive or incidental to the main dispute.
Procedural preliminary issues delaying substantive determination. In at least one case (case 2, M/s Junior Chamber), the source preview shows that a condonation of delay application was pending, indicating that procedural thresholds must be satisfied before the tribunal reaches the merits of exemption-related grounds. Researchers tracking the substantive outcome should verify whether the delay was condoned and the appeal was heard on merits.
Revenue as appellant before High Courts. In cases 8, 9, and 11, the Revenue (as Commissioner or Director of Income Tax, Exemptions) is the appellant before the respective High Courts, having lost before the ITAT. This pattern suggests that lower tribunals have, in a notable share of these matters, ruled in favour of the assessee on exemption grounds, prompting Revenue appeals under Section 260-A.

How to use this compilation

This index is intended as a first-pass research tool to identify relevant rulings, courts, benches, and assessment years for further investigation. Each entry above provides the core identity fields and a brief procedural note drawn only from the available source preview. Because many text previews in this compilation are procedural in nature or truncated, the substantive reasoning in several cases is not captured here. Researchers must retrieve the full text of each judgment — from indiankanoon.org, the respective High Court portals, or official ITAT order repositories — before drawing any conclusions about the holding, ratio, or reasoning in a particular case.

Before relying on any ruling indexed here, it is essential to check whether the order has been stayed, reversed, remanded, or distinguished by a subsequent order of a coordinate or superior bench. Tax litigation in India is dynamic: an ITAT order may be challenged before a High Court, and a High Court ruling may be appealed to the Supreme Court. The absence of a subsequent-proceedings note in this index does not mean that the order indexed is the final word on the matter.

Finally, researchers should cross-reference the rulings with applicable CBDT circulars, notifications, and Finance Act amendments concerning the exemption regime. Section 13(8) itself was introduced by the Finance Act, 2022, which means older rulings in this compilation that pre-date the amendment may have been decided under a different statutory position; their precedential value should be assessed with reference to the legislative timeline.

Source

All cases listed above are drawn from the TaxNoticeAI structured legal corpus (16,101 Indian tax judgments, CBIC circulars, ITAT rulings, AAR rulings, GSTAT rulings), sourced from indiankanoon.org and official court portals.

Section 13(8) Income Tax Exemption: 12 ITAT and HC Rulings (2018–2026)