LAKSHMI TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ITO, (E) - II, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are treated as partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

10 4. Ld. CIT(Appeals) did not find merit in the submissions made on behalf of the assessee-Trusts. According to him, all the Trusts belonging to the same group were only transferring their funds to each other in order to get the benefit of section 11 without doing any real charitable activities. He noted that the donations were made

LOTUS CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. DIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

10 Lotus Charitable Trust AY 2009-10 On appeal, the assessee submitted that registration once granted to the assessee being a charitable institution could not be cancelled or taken away because of the newly inserted proviso to section 2(15) which defines charitable purposes.” The decision of the Mumbai Tribunal on the said case is as under: 5.4 Thus

ACIT(EXEMPTIONS), CIR-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. HOOGHLY ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SOCIETY, HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1579/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Acit (Exemptions), Cir-1, Kolkata -Vs- Hooghly Engineering & Technology College Society [Pan: Aaah 2856 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable objects. The ld AO show caused the assessee as to why the said payment of advances should not be treated as violation of provisions of section 13 of the Act. The assessee replied that it had not violated the provisions of section 13(2)(a) read with section 13(3) of the Act and that the payments were made

BALLARAM HANUMANDAS CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13

10 Anadaman Timber Industries in civil appeal no. 4228 of 2006. The relevant extract of the judgment reads as under: "According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity inasmuch

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

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

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

charitable as the activities of the ICC are squarely covered by the provisions of Section 2(15), section 11 and 13(8) of the Act. Without prejudice, the Ld. A.R submitted that had the expenses been allocated on some rational and scientific basis in both the assessment years, they would have been considerable loss from the business which proved beyond

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]

charitable as the activities of the ICC are squarely covered by the provisions of Section 2(15), section 11 and 13(8) of the Act. Without prejudice, the Ld. A.R submitted that had the expenses been allocated on some rational and scientific basis in both the assessment years, they would have been considerable loss from the business which proved beyond

PANCHI BIBI WAKF ESTATE,KOLKATA vs. DDIT (E)-II, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

charitable purposes. From the above we find that it is not disputed that the business undertaking of the assessee is held under trust and it is for the attainment of the objects of the trust. The assessee has maintained its books of accounts as a whole and got them duly audited. Since the business of the assessee is held under

I.T.O(E)-II, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. FUTURE EDUCATION RESCARCH TRUST., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s CO is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & C.O.No.69/Kol/2013 (A/O Ita No.1031/Kol/2013) Assessment Year:2009-10

13(l)(d), maximum marginal rate of tax under Section 164(2), proviso is applicable only to that part of income of the Trust which has forfeited exemption and not the entire income. Relevant paragraph reads as under: Sec. 164(2) refers to the relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes

JHA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Partha Sarathi Chowdhury

section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act vide No. CCIT-III/Kol/10(23C)(vi)/13-14/246 dated 16.01.2014. 5.1 The assessee-trust was established with the objects of public & charitable purposes. The assessee was also running school under the name & style of ‘Calcutta Public School’ in Kolkata & Ranchi. 6. The background of the case is that a survey operation was conducted

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

trust as commercial activity by invoking the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act thereby the denying of exemption u/s11 of the Act. 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is registered u/s 12A of the Act vide order No. DIT(E)/6347/8E/79/81-82 dated 30.09.1989. The Ld. A.R submitted that the assessee

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

trust as commercial activity by invoking the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act thereby the denying of exemption u/s11 of the Act. 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is registered u/s 12A of the Act vide order No. DIT(E)/6347/8E/79/81-82 dated 30.09.1989. The Ld. A.R submitted that the assessee

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIA FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3),EXEMPT, KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

trust as commercial activity by invoking the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act thereby the denying of exemption u/s11 of the Act. 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is registered u/s 12A of the Act vide order No. DIT(E)/6347/8E/79/81-82 dated 30.09.1989. The Ld. A.R submitted that the assessee

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), EXEMPTION , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

trust from the said activity exceed Rs. 10 Lakh therefore the object of general public utility cannot be considered as charitable. 5. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the facts of the instant assessment year before us are similar to the facts

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

13(8) and thus denied exemption u/s 11 of the Act to that part of income of the assessee which is received in respect of the so called business activities by segregating and bifurcating the total/gross receipts into two segments namely business segment and charitable segment. The AO apportioned and allocated the administrative expenses incurred by the ICC proportionately

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

charitable institution and is entitled to the exemption u/s. 11 on the ground that services rendered by the assessee trust as public utility services is very meager and, therefore, sec. 2(15) is not applicable. The relevant finding of the Tribunal reads as under: “5. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that

M/S BENGAL SHRISTI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Charitable Trust (2009) 308 ITR 161 (SC) 4.3. On the issue of deduction of interest u/s 194A of the Act, it was submitted that ADDA was granted registration by the ITAT and hence no tax was required to be deducted at source even as per the order of the ld. CIT(A). It was argued that ADDA was a statutory

JAGANNATH GUPTA FAMILY TRUST,KOLKATA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: : Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. A.L. Saini

charitable trust or institution has to be considered during assessment proceedings. 44. It is significant to mention that registration under section 12AA, does not necessarily entitle the assessee to get the income excluded from the income of the previous year for the purpose of determination of tax liability but it only entitles the assessee to claim such exemption, which otherwise

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

H.P. BUDHIA CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ITO, (EXP.), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

10 A.Y. 2016-2017 H.P. Budhia Charitable Trust prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Both the conditions must be fulfilled. (ii) Sec. 263 cannot be invoked to correct each and every type of mistake or error committed by the AO and it was only when an order is erroneous that the section will be attracted. (iii) An incorrect assumption