COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA vs. AKLING CHARITY TRUST

The appeals are dismissed and substantial questions

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 12AA(3) of the Income Tax Act, is perverse in law considering the explanatory notes of Finance Act, 2010 ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel assisted by Mr. Radhamohan Roy, learned advocate for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Swapna Das and Mr. Siddhartha Das, learned

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA vs. KISHORE KANTI KHANDELWAL CHARITY TRUST

The appeals are dismissed and substantial questions

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 12AA(3) of the Income Tax Act, is perverse in law considering the explanatory notes of Finance Act, 2010 ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel assisted by Mr. Radhamohan Roy, learned advocate for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Swapna Das and Mr. Siddhartha Das, learned

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA vs. ASHOK KUMAR MEMORIAL TRUST

The appeals are dismissed and substantial questions

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 12AA(3) of the Income Tax Act, is perverse in law considering the explanatory notes of Finance Act, 2010 ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel assisted by Mr. Radhamohan Roy, learned advocate for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Swapna Das and Mr. Siddhartha Das, learned

COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS ) KOLKATA vs. HARSH VARDHAN CHARITY TRUST

The appeals are dismissed and substantial questions

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 12AA(3) of the Income Tax Act, is perverse in law considering the explanatory notes of Finance Act, 2010 ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel assisted by Mr. Radhamohan Roy, learned advocate for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Swapna Das and Mr. Siddhartha Das, learned

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS) KOLKATA vs. NAWAL KISHORE KEJRIWALCHARITY TRUST

The appeals are dismissed and substantial questions

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 12AA(3) of the Income Tax Act, is perverse in law considering the explanatory notes of Finance Act, 2010 ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel assisted by Mr. Radhamohan Roy, learned advocate for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Swapna Das and Mr. Siddhartha Das, learned

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS ) KOLKATA vs. ALWAR CHARITY TRUST

The appeals are dismissed and substantial questions

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 12AA(3) of the Income Tax Act, is perverse in law considering the explanatory notes of Finance Act, 2010 ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel assisted by Mr. Radhamohan Roy, learned advocate for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Swapna Das and Mr. Siddhartha Das, learned

M/S. OUTOTEC (CANADA) LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAX)-2(1)

The appeals are dismissed and substantial questions

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

4 12AA(3) of the Income Tax Act, is perverse in law considering the explanatory notes of Finance Act, 2010 ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel assisted by Mr. Radhamohan Roy, learned advocate for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J. P. Khaitan, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Swapna Das and Mr. Siddhartha Das, learned

CIT (EXEMPTION) KOLKATA vs. M/S GOBIND RAM GOEL CHARITABLE TRUST

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Trust. 5. Aggrieved with the order of the CIT (E) cancelling the registration of the respondent assessee under Section 12AA(3) of the Act, 1961, the respondent assessee filed an appeal being ITA Nos.728 & 729/Kol/2016 4 [Gobind Ram Goel Charitable

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , ASANSOL vs. KALYAN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY

Bench: :

charitable or religious trust – registration of – clarification with regard to time allowed for filing of return of income subsequent to insertion of Clause (ba) in Sub-section (1) of Section 12A. The Circular refers to various representations received on the subject while processing the income tax returns for the assessment year 2018-19 in respect of belated income tax returns

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA vs. SETH JAGANNATH BAJORIA CHARITABLE TRUST

The appeal is dismissed and the substantial

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date: January 3, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. Debashis Chowdhury, Adv. … For The Appellant/Revenue Mr. Akhilesh Gupta, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17Th March, 2017 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) In Ita No. 19/Kol/2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law Raised For Our Consideration;

Section 12AA of the Act on the sole ground that the Deed of Trust did not contain a dissolution clause. 3 On perusal of the order dated 4th November, 2015, we find that CIT(E) did not doubt the genuineness of the activities of the respondent/Trust. The assessee Trust carried the matter on appeal before the Tribunal, specifically by producing

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) KOLKATA vs. MAYAPUR DHAM PILGRIM AND VISITORS TRUST

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

trust. With this allegation, the assessee was requested to explain why the registration granted under Section 12A should not be cancelled by invoking Section 12AA(3) of the Act. The assessee submitted their reply dated 4th December, 2015 stating that they 4 are a public charitable

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) , KOLKATA vs. CONTAI ROTARY COMMUNITY WELFARE TRUST

In the result, the appeal is

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Trust. Therefore, the assessee contended that they are not engaged in any business activity and medical relief is one of the charitable activities as defined under Section 2(15) of the Act. The said contention was examined by the Tribunal and it was found that the respondent/assessee would qualify for grant of registration under Section 12AA

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA vs. SHRI SHANTI KUMAR SURANA

Bench: HON'BLE T.S. SIVAGNANAM, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 and proceed to decide the issues. The petitioners as trustees are allowed to enter into a development agreement with Satya Krishna Enterprise only if the trustees make the following provision for the duties:- 1) A specific portion of the said premises which should be not less than 2 cottahs with

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CENTURY ENKA LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

4 listed companies, 3 subsidiaries of one listed company and an unlisted company is bad in law since the Joint APLs merely represents the estate of PDB and thus, had no rights to seek appointment of Directors in companies in which PDB was not a "Member". Further, without prejudice, it is submitted that such appointment of Directors cannot be made

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S V2 RETAIL LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

4 listed companies, 3 subsidiaries of one listed company and an unlisted company is bad in law since the Joint APLs merely represents the estate of PDB and thus, had no rights to seek appointment of Directors in companies in which PDB was not a "Member". Further, without prejudice, it is submitted that such appointment of Directors cannot be made

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. JAGANNATH BANWARILAL TEXOFABS PVT LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

4 listed companies, 3 subsidiaries of one listed company and an unlisted company is bad in law since the Joint APLs merely represents the estate of PDB and thus, had no rights to seek appointment of Directors in companies in which PDB was not a "Member". Further, without prejudice, it is submitted that such appointment of Directors cannot be made

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. J.J.EXPORTERS LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

4 listed companies, 3 subsidiaries of one listed company and an unlisted company is bad in law since the Joint APLs merely represents the estate of PDB and thus, had no rights to seek appointment of Directors in companies in which PDB was not a "Member". Further, without prejudice, it is submitted that such appointment of Directors cannot be made

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. L D S CITY PROJECTS PVT LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

4 listed companies, 3 subsidiaries of one listed company and an unlisted company is bad in law since the Joint APLs merely represents the estate of PDB and thus, had no rights to seek appointment of Directors in companies in which PDB was not a "Member". Further, without prejudice, it is submitted that such appointment of Directors cannot be made