BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

131 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 143(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai607Delhi379Chennai204Bangalore168Ahmedabad166Pune158Jaipur148Kolkata131Hyderabad116Chandigarh77Indore61Cochin54Lucknow43Allahabad36Surat33Amritsar33Rajkot29Cuttack29Visakhapatnam28Agra26Nagpur23Patna21Jodhpur20Raipur18Dehradun12Guwahati11SC9Ranchi8Jabalpur6Panaji4Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 11155Section 12A123Section 143(1)115Exemption79Section 25059Section 143(3)55Charitable Trust53Section 80G51Section 1044

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

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

ITA 933/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

trust are hit by proviso to section 2(15) read with Section 13(8) of the Act and therefore the exemption u/s 11 of the Act would not be available to the assessee as the activities of organizing meetings, conferences and various seminars constituted business activity and also the fact that the receipt of assessee from these activities exceeded

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

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

Showing 1–20 of 131 · Page 1 of 7

Addition to Income43
Section 26342
Deduction29
ITA 934/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

trust are hit by proviso to section 2(15) read with Section 13(8) of the Act and therefore the exemption u/s 11 of the Act would not be available to the assessee as the activities of organizing meetings, conferences and various seminars constituted business activity and also the fact that the receipt of assessee from these activities exceeded

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 499/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

Section 2(15) of the Act is clearly attracted as receipt of the 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

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

ITA 1123/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

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

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

section 2(15) of the Act to the assessee vide order dated 28.06.2024. In the said order, the Coordinate Bench first held that the assessee is a 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

M/S. PINNACCLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST,SODEPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), EXEMPT, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 591/KOL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

section 11 and I.T.A. No.: 591/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24 M/s. Pinnaccle Educational Trust. only 0.6% of the aggregate income should have been charged to tax due to non-application of income during the year. 2. For that even otherwise the case of the assessee is selected for scrutiny and therefore the intimation u/s 143(1) was itself

PS MAGNUM,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-29, KOLKATA

ITA 136/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

ABHILASH TRADECOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), KOLKATA

ITA 133/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

HIRALAL BHANDARI, LEGAL HAIR OF LATE CHAMPALAL BHANDARI,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-37, KOLKATA

ITA 2449/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

REACHASIA,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-29, KOLKATA

ITA 108/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

M/S COALSALE CO.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-34, KOLKATA

ITA 23/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

TARASAFE INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-15(2), KOLKATA

ITA 261/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

REACHASIA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR.-29, KOLKATA

ITA 107/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

ABHILASH TRADECOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), KOLKATA

ITA 132/KOL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

ORIENT INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 35, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 2247/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

HIRALAL BHANDARI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-37(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 2317/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

HIRALAL BHANDARI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-37(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 2316/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

M/S H.K.DUTTA & CO.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-37, KOLKATA

ITA 2385/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

HIRALAL BHANDARI, LEGAL HAIR OF LATE CHAMPALAL BHANDARI,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-37, KOLKATA

ITA 2448/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 12. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 28.08.2019 passed for A.Y. 2014-15. 12.1. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming

M/S MERINO INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 923/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Pcit-2, M/S Merino Panel Products Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, Chowringhee 5, Alexandra Court, 601/1, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata- Square, Kolkata-700069, Vs. 700020, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcm5672Q Pcit-2, M/S Merino Industries Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, Chowringhee 5, Alexandra Court, 601/1, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata- Square, Kolkata-700069, Vs. 700020, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc9186C Assessee By : Shri Shyam Sundar Jha, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Sundar Jha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

143(3B) of the Act on 16.04.2021 by National e- Assessment center, Dehi, assessing the income at ₹80,40,30,793/-. The ld. PCIT on examination of the assessment records found that the assessee has incurred CSR expenses of ₹1,38,50,000/- during the year which were suo-motto disallowed in the computation of income by the assessee. However

M/S MERINO PANEL PRODUCTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 922/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Pcit-2, M/S Merino Panel Products Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, Chowringhee 5, Alexandra Court, 601/1, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata- Square, Kolkata-700069, Vs. 700020, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcm5672Q Pcit-2, M/S Merino Industries Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, Chowringhee 5, Alexandra Court, 601/1, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata- Square, Kolkata-700069, Vs. 700020, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc9186C Assessee By : Shri Shyam Sundar Jha, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Sundar Jha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

143(3B) of the Act on 16.04.2021 by National e- Assessment center, Dehi, assessing the income at ₹80,40,30,793/-. The ld. PCIT on examination of the assessment records found that the assessee has incurred CSR expenses of ₹1,38,50,000/- during the year which were suo-motto disallowed in the computation of income by the assessee. However