How many judgments cite Calcutta Management Association v. ITO?

14 judgments on BharatTax cite Calcutta Management Association v. ITO (42 ITD 62), spanning 2020 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Calcutta Management Association v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11, Section 12A, Section 139(1), Section 139(9), Section 143(1), Section 11(2).

Calcutta Management Association v. ITO

42 ITD 62Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1992#7916 most cited

What is Calcutta Management Association v. ITO authority for?

An Assessing Officer is not justified in rejecting a claim for exemption under section 11 of the Income-tax Act. The ITAT has also held that an opportunity of being heard need not be afforded under section 139(9) in certain circumstances.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Calcutta Management Association v. ITO · 42 ITD 62 · section 11 · section 139(9) · exemption · charitable trust · opportunity of being heard · rejection of claim

Sections most often in play

Section 11 Section 12A Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 11(2)Section 147 Section 10(23C)

Issues it is cited on

section 139(9)section 12a(1)(b)section 11(2)section 11(1)(a)section 119(2)(b)mistake apparent from record section 10(23c)section 12aa application of income section 12a(1)commissioner (appeals)section 143(1)(a)

Judgments citing Calcutta Management Association v. ITO

Goswami Bhagwan Lal Educational Society, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward Exemption, Faridabad

ITA 2238/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10Section 10(230)Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…ty of being heard under section 139(9) of the Act nor the Ld. Addl. CIT(A) in rejecting the alternate claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act: (i) Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal Motilal Malwasie Trust 195 ITR 825, (Cal), (ii) Calcutta Management Association 42 ITD 62, (iii) Sankulp Welfare Society 303 ITR 64, (iv) National Horticulture Board 176 taxman.167 and (v) Sahja Nand Charity Trust 228 ITR 292. 5 Goswami Bhagwan Lal Education Society 7. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Ld. AO had erred in disallowing the expenditure (revenue & capital expenditure), in entirety, claimed in the ITR which had been in…

Madhyam, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- Exemp 1(4), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1456/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154

…rcular and following judicial decisions, submitted that the Ld. AO was not justified in rejecting the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act: (i) Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal Motilal Malwasie Trust 195 ITR 825, (Cal) (ii) Calcutta Management Association 42 ITD 62 (iii) Sankulp Welfare Society 303 ITR 64 (iv) National Horticulture Board 176 taxman.167 (v) Sahja Nand Charity Trust 228 ITR 292 5. Alternatively, the Ld. Counsel submitted that after rejection the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act, at most the income as per the Income & Expenditure account of the assessee would have been taxed inste…

P D Memorial Trust, Delhi vs. Dlc-Ca-2, Range- 48, Ward Exemp 2(4), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3784/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

…d Circular and following judicial decisions, submitted that the AO was not justified in rejecting the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act: (i) Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal Motilal Malwasie Trust 195 ITR 825, (Cal) (ii) Calcutta Management Association 42 ITD 62 5 P.D.Memorial Trust (iii) Sankulp Welfare Society 303 ITR 64 (iv) National Horticulture Board 176 taxman.167 (v) Sahja Nand Charity Trust 228 ITR 292 4.1 Alternatively, the Ld. AR submitted that after rejection the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act, at most the income as per the Income & Expenditure account of the assessee would h…

The Vedic Culture Centre, Delhi vs. ITO Ward(Exemption)-2(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 780/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.780/Del./2025, A.Y. 2022-23 The Vedic Culture Centre Income Tax Officer, 7, Institutional Area Ward (Exemption)-2(3), Lodhi Road, New Delhi-3 Vs. Civic Centre, Minto Road, Pan: Aaatt0811G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. V. Raja Kumar, Advocate Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/07/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am The Appeal For The Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2022-23 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.01.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, New Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

For Appellant: d. determining taxable income at Rs.75,60,590/-against NIL return

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

…d Circular and following judicial decisions, submitted that the AO was not justified in rejecting the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act: (i) Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal Motilal Malwasie Trust 195 ITR 825, (Cal) (ii) Calcutta Management Association 42 ITD 62 (iii) Sankulp Welfare Society 303 ITR 64 (iv) National Horticulture Board 176 taxman.167 (v) Sahja Nand Charity Trust 228 ITR 292 4.1 Alternatively, the Ld. Counsel submitted that after rejection the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act, at most the income as per the instead of the gross receipts of Rs.75,60,590/-. The corresponding expe…

Rajasthan State Bharat Scout and Guide, Jaipur vs. Income-Tax Officer (Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 382/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 11(5)

…e and it is permissible for the assessee to produce the audit report at a later stage either before the Income- tax Officer or before the appellate authority by assigning sufficient cause Similarly, In the case of Calcutta Management Association v. ITO (1992) 42 ITD 62 the Hon'ble Calcutta bench of the Tribunal held that the Audit Report can even be filed at the time of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) Similar analogy is applicable for Form 10 as well. 21. Other various Courts also took the view that the benefit of exemption should not be denied merely on account of delay in furnishing the audit report an…

Rajasthan State Bharat Scout and Guide, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Holding Charge of ITO Exemptions, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 381/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 11(5)

ITO(E), Vadodara, Race Ciurse Vadodara vs. Takshshila Foundation(Ngo), Karelibaugh, Vadodara

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 118/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Jul 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member & Co No.8/Ahd/2024 (In Ita No.118/Ahd/2024 – By Assessee) Assessment Year : 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer (E) Takshshila Foundation (Ngo) (Ward) Vs B/15, Suhas Society Race Course Harni Road Vadodara 390 007 Karelibaug, Vadodara – 390 018 (Gujarat) Pan:Aaatt 5363 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent & Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri D.K. Parikh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Arises From The Order Of The Office Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/Jcit (A)–6, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Dated 08-12-2023, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23 Against The Intimation/Order Passed U/S. 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) By Cpc, Bengaluru & The Assessee Is In Cross Objection Thereof.

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ “D”, अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद । अहमदाबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ D ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER And CO No.8/Ahd/2024 (in ITA No.118/Ahd/2024 – By Assessee) Assessment Year : 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer (E) Takshshila Foundation (NGO) (Ward) Vs B/15, Suhas Society Race Course Harni Road Vadodara 390 007 Karelibaug, Vadodara – 390 018 (Gujarat) PAN:AAATT 5363…

Acil Navasar Jan Rural Development Foundation, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exem) Ward1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 3743/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Priti Kamble (Accountant)For Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR

Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2015-16 ACIL Navasar Jan Rural CIT(A) (National Faceless Appeal Development Foundation, Centre) Delhi and AO (National Vs. 408, New Udyog Mandir No. 2, Faceless Appeal Centre,) Mogul Lane Mahim (West), CIT(A) (National Faceless Appeal Mumbai-400016. Centre) Delhi and AO (Exemption, Ward 1(1), Mumbai. PAN NO. AAATA 0898 E Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Priti Kamble (Accountant) Revenue by : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR : Date of Hearing…

Dushkal Go Sewa Samiti, Sumerpur vs. ITO (Exemption), Jodhpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 9/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Section 11Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

…erely a procedural requirement, and that exemption cannot be denied so long as the report is available to the assessing officer before the completion of assessment. Calcutta Management Association The Hon’ble Calcutta bench of the Tribunal held vs. ITO (1992) 42 ITD 62, that the Audit Report can even be filed at the time of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Swajan Pariwar Trust vs.ADIT(E) A similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble (1997) 57 TTJ (Mum) (SMC) 77, Mumbai Bench of Tribunal that where the trust filed the audit report along with a rectification application under section 154, it was entitled to…

Dushkal Go Sewa Samiti, Sumerpur vs. ITO (Exemption), Jodhpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Section 11Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

DCIT, Circle Exemption Jaipur, Jaipur vs. State Institute of Health and Family Welfare, Jaipr

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 267/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Pooonia, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 288Section 44A

…t report with the return is merely a procedural requirement, and that exemption cannot be denied so long as the report is available to the assessing officer before the completion of assessment (ii) In the case of Calcutta Management Association vs. ITO (1992) 42 ITD 62 the Calcutta bench of the Tribunal held that the Audit Report can even be filed at the time of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). (iii) On a similar issue the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur Hotel Owners Association [2001] 114 Taxman 255 (SC) held "It is abundantly clear from the wordings of sub-section (2) of section 11…

The India Industrial Mission, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 411/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 411/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 The India Industrial Mission Deputy Commissioner Of Income 5A, Seals Garden Lane Tax, (Cpc), Bangaluru Vs Cossipore Kolkata - 700002 Pan : Aacct0072E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Jhajaria, Fca/ Shri Sujoy Sen, A/R & Pritee Bhubna, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/06/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Girish Agrawal: The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Commisioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1035133519(1), Dt. 27/08/2021, Against The Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Issued By Cpc, Bengaluru, Vide Communication Reference No. Cpc/1718/A7/1875540238, Order Dt. 27/03/2019, For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Issue Raised By The Assessee Vide This Appeal Relates To Disallowance Of Claim Made By The Assessee U/S 11 Of The Act. Before Us, Shri Siddhartha Jhajharia, Fca Along With Sujoy Sen, Represented The Assessee & Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit, Represented The Department. Ld. Counsel Submitted A Paper Book Containing 24 Pages, Which Is Placed On Record. Ld. Counsel Also Referred To The Additional Grounds Raised Before This Tribunal Filed On 26/04/2022 In Respect Of Processing Of Return U/S 143(1) Wherein No Disallowance Or Addition Can Be Made Which Are Not Apparent On Record Or Are Debatable Or Has To Be Resolved By A Long Drawn Process Of Reasoning & Accordingly, The Intimation Issued U/S 143(1) By The Cpc, Bengaluru By Making A Disallowance U/S 11 Of The Act Is Not Sustainable.

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Jhajaria, FCA/For Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. CIT, D/R

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 26

…wer the question in this reference in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.” 5.2. Reference was also made by the ld. Counsel to a decision of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Kolkata in the case of Calcutta Management Association vs. ITO reported in [1992] 42 ITD 62 (Calcutta), wherein it was held that, Assessing Officer was not justified in refusing the benefit of exemption under section 11 for simple reason that appellant had violated the provisions of section 12A(b) as it had not filed audit report in Form No. 10B along with its return of income. It was also held in the said decision that, Commissioner (App…

Sicot India Foundation, Mumbai vs. DCIT(CPC), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4328/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Or At, The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal, So As To Enable The Hon. Ita'I To Decide This Appeal According To Law.

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 234C

…ellant in their submission have further referred to the provisions of Sec.12AA, referred to the Circular of CBDT vide No.267/482/77-IT(Part) dated 09.02.1978 and also placed reliance on following decisions :- i. Calcutta Management Association vs. ITO (1992) 42 ITD 62. ii. Swajan Pariwar Trust vs. ADIT(E) (1997) 57 TTJ(Mum)(SMC)77 iii. CIT vs. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries (1993) 201 ITR 325(Guj) iv. National Horticulture Board vs. CCIT(2009) 176 Taxman 167 (P&H) v. CIT vs. Hardeodas Agarwala Trust(1992) 198 ITR 511 (Calutta) vi. CIT vs. Shanzedanand Chanty (1977) 228 ITR 292 (PH) The appellant, accordingly h…

The West Bengal National University of Juridicial Science, Kolkata vs. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2643/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2020AY 2016-17

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2Section 263

…essment. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the g the assessment. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the g the assessment. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Calcutta Management Association vs. ITO (1992) 42 ITD 62 Tribunal in the case of Calcutta Management Association vs. ITO (1992) 42 ITD 62 Tribunal in the case of Calcutta Management Association vs. ITO (1992) 42 ITD 62 (Cal) wherein the Tribunal allowed time for filing Form No. 10B even upto the the Tribunal allowed time for filing Form No. 10B even upto the the Tribunal allowed time for filing Form No.…