INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

dividends to its members. Its entire receipts/revenue are being spent for the fulfillment of its objectives as per its Memorandum and Articles of Association(hereinafter referred to 3 I.T.A. Nos.933 & 934/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Indian Chamber of Commerce as MAA). The assessee is formed as association of various industrialists, organizations and other commercial entities for the development

THE WEST BENGAL NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF JURIDICIAL SCIENCE,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION) , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable or religious purposes, either during the period of accumulation or thereafter.] purposes, either during the period of accumulation or thereafter.] Section 13(9) of the Act, reads as follows: Section 13(9) of the Act, reads as follows:- “[(9) Nothing contained in sub [(9) Nothing contained in sub-section (2) of section 11 shall operate so as to exclude

ACIT(E), CIR -1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL TRANSPORT WORKERS SOCIAL SECURITY SCHEME, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Raviacit(E), Vs West Bengal Transport Workers Circle-1, 5Th Floor, Social Security Scheme, 10B, Middleton Row, 6, Church Lane, 4Th Floor, Kolkata-700071. Kolkata-700001. Pan-Aaalw0133G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sankar Halder, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh.S.M.Surana, Advocate Date Of Hearing 29.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2019 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravithis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 26.04.2016 Passed By Cit(A)-25, Kolkata For Ay 2011-12 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”).

charitable or religious purposes or by an institution established wholly or partly for such purposes or by an association or institution referred to in clause (21) or clause (23), or by a fund or trust or institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or by any university or other educational institution referred to in sub-clause

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. ADD.CIT,RANGE-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

dividend income. The AO did not agree with the claim of the Assessee and he estimated the disallowance on a different basis. The question is whether it is mandatory for the AO to apply Rule 8D of the Rules, the moment he rejects the basis of disallowance as made by the AO. We are of the view that even

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. K. B. CAPITAL LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue as well as that of the assessee, both are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

dividend is to the extent of Rs.37,34,300/- and long term capital gain of Rs.5,62,20,229/- in AY 2007-08. Rule 8D of the Rules is not applicable in this assessment year in the assessee’s case as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (Supra) being prospective

K.B. CAPITAL MARKETS (P) LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue as well as that of the assessee, both are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

dividend is to the extent of Rs.37,34,300/- and long term capital gain of Rs.5,62,20,229/- in AY 2007-08. Rule 8D of the Rules is not applicable in this assessment year in the assessee’s case as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (Supra) being prospective

AVIS TIE UP PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 11,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

charitable to donation has already been suo motu disallowed in the computation of income, the interest claimed on expenditure has no nexus with this exempted income and therefore it is allowable expense u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Finally, assessee submitted that balance expenses of ₹3,63,114/- can be at the most subject to the provision

AVIS TIE UP PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 11,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

charitable to donation has already been suo motu disallowed in the computation of income, the interest claimed on expenditure has no nexus with this exempted income and therefore it is allowable expense u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Finally, assessee submitted that balance expenses of ₹3,63,114/- can be at the most subject to the provision