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]

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

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

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

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

JERMELS ACCADEMY,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD 2(2), EXEMP,, SILIGURI

In the result, all the 3 appeals filed by the Assessee are partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

144 was passed\non 26.12.2019 and the appellant had preferred appeal against the\nassessment order on 21.01.2020. The appellant was granted a Provisional\nRegistration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) on 31.08.2021 and the appellate\norder under section 250 was passed on 31.07.2023. Thus, it is clear that\nthe Provisional Registration under section 12 A(1)(ac)(vi) was received

JERMELS ACCADEMY ,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD 2(2), EXEMP, , SILIGURI

144 was passed\non 26.12.2019 and the appellant had preferred appeal against the\nassessment order on 21.01.2020. The appellant was granted a Provisional\nRegistration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) on 31.08.2021 and the appellate\norder under section 250 was passed on 31.07.2023. Thus, it is clear that\nthe Provisional Registration under section 12 A(1)(ac)(vi) was received

DREAMLAND EDUCATION SOCIETY,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIR-2, HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos. 489-495/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2011-12

Trust, Society, Individual, Partnership firm or company. Here in the case of Dreamland Educational Society which derives excess of income over expenditure should reasonably be considered income under the head -' Income From Other Sources' under section 2(24(iia) read with section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act.” 6 7 ITA Nos.489-495/Kol/2016 Dreamland Education Society A.Yrs

SOCIETY FOR TRAINING AND RESEARCH ON PANCHAYATS AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, KALYANI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-41, NADIA, NADIA

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.161/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2010-2011) Society For Training & Vs. Acit-Circle, Kurchipota Research On Panchayats Lane, Krishna Nagar, Nadia & Rural Development, Kalyani Nadia, West Bengal. Icmard Building, 6Th Floor, Block -14/2, Cit Scheme Viii (M), Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata-700067 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadts2844P .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anjan Kumar Bandyopadhyay Revenue By : Shri Tanuj Negi , Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 28/10/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 23/11/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2010-2011, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxvi, Kolkata In Appeal No.229/Cit(A)-Xxxvi/Kol/Acit,Cir/Nadia/2013-14 Dated 29.10.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 22/03/2013. 2. The Brief Facts Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 29/03/2010 Declaring Total Income Nil. The Assessee`S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S 143(3) Of The Act & The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment By Making Addition Of Rs. 38,21,630. During

144 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved from the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld CIT(A), who has also confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer observing the followings: “5.0 Appellant`s submission and facts available on record is carefully considered. Assessment record was called for and verified. On verification of assessment record

WEST BENGAL TRADE PROMOTION ORGANISATION LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD - 1(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.36/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

144 of the Act should be merged with the Appeal No. ITA No.122/CIT(A)- 25/Kol./2015-16. 4. That the CIT (A) has failed to realise that the appellant has been granted registration under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 03.05.2013 whereas the notice for reopening the assessment was issued on 27.03.2014 and as such the reopening

DCIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KARMAPA CHARITABLE TRUST,

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Tribunal Is Condoned & We Proceed To Hear The Appeal On Merits.

Charitable Trust. PAN: AABTK8032B Dharma Chakra Centre Rumtek, East Sikkim … Respondent Assessee For the Appellant Revenue : Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT –DR For the Respondent Assessee : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.AR Date of hearing : 18-10-2017 Date of pronouncement : 10-01-2018 ORDER ShriS.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM: This appeal by the Revenue against the order dt. 30-03-2015 passed

DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. A.R. STANCHEM (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

144 taxmann.com 39 (Cal) dated 12.08.2022. Relevant extract of Ld. CIT(A)’s findings are as under: “I have carefully considered the facts of the case and submission of the appellant. I have also gone through the case laws. It is a fact that the year in which donations were given to M/s. School of Human Genetics & Population Health

GYAN BHARTI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

144 of the Act requesting for reprocessing of his I.T.A. No.: 1548/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Gyan Bharti Educational Trust. return. The request of rectification was disposed of by disallowing the entire amount of income and determining income of the appellant as Rs. 1,58,19,677/- though the declared income of the assessee was ‘NIL’. The assessee has preferred

SARLABEN BHANSALI CHARITIES TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT, (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable trust. It filed its return for A.Y. 2009-10 on 11.10.2010 declaring NIL income. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 and thereafter completed the 2 I.T.A. No. 663 & 76/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sarlaben Bhansali Charities Trust assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) & Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) determining the total income

SARLABEN BHANSALI CHARITIES TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable trust. It filed its return for A.Y. 2009-10 on 11.10.2010 declaring NIL income. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 and thereafter completed the 2 I.T.A. No. 663 & 76/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sarlaben Bhansali Charities Trust assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) & Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) determining the total income

DAROGA FAMILY FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

144 of the Act dated 07.03.2023 received by the assessee showing a net demand of Rs. 3,03,430/- stating the reason that Form-10B has not been filed. The total income has been shown u/s 154 of the Act as Rs. 79,685/-. The assessee submitted application before ld. CIT (Exemption) for condonation of delay in filing Form

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

S D RAI PRAYAS EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT WARD 50(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2020-21 S D Rai Prayas Educational Trust……………..……….….……….……Appellant Flat No.Ge Building No.11, Brijdham Housing Complex, Canal Street, Vip Road, Shree Bhumi, North 24 Parganas, Kol-700048.. [Pan: Aavts2993M] Vs. Assessment Unit Ward-50(1), Kolkata …………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent

144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act making addition of Rs.77,56,664/-under the head as income from other sources and penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s 270A of the IT Act were also initiated on this issue. 3. Aggrieved by the said intimation order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed as the appeal

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.1880,1881&1882/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12,2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata.........................….................……...…..…Appellant Vs. M/S Eveready Industries India Ltd.........................................…..…..Respondent 2, Rainey Park, Kolkata-700019. [Pan: Aaace5778N] Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 30, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders All Dated 22.06.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In All The Appeals, Hence These Have Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.1880/Kol/2018 For Assessment Year 2011-12 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.1880/Kol/2018 – The Revenue In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

sections 92A to 92F of the Act and rules. 10A to 10E of the Rules and also maintained necessary information and documentation in support thereof. However from the SCN issued by the Ld. TPO as well as his impugned order, I find that no ground whatsoever has been set out for rejecting the TP analysis performed by the appellant. Such

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.1880,1881&1882/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12,2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata.........................….................……...…..…Appellant Vs. M/S Eveready Industries India Ltd.........................................…..…..Respondent 2, Rainey Park, Kolkata-700019. [Pan: Aaace5778N] Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 30, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders All Dated 22.06.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In All The Appeals, Hence These Have Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.1880/Kol/2018 For Assessment Year 2011-12 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.1880/Kol/2018 – The Revenue In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

sections 92A to 92F of the Act and rules. 10A to 10E of the Rules and also maintained necessary information and documentation in support thereof. However from the SCN issued by the Ld. TPO as well as his impugned order, I find that no ground whatsoever has been set out for rejecting the TP analysis performed by the appellant. Such

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.1880,1881&1882/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12,2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata.........................….................……...…..…Appellant Vs. M/S Eveready Industries India Ltd.........................................…..…..Respondent 2, Rainey Park, Kolkata-700019. [Pan: Aaace5778N] Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 30, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders All Dated 22.06.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In All The Appeals, Hence These Have Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.1880/Kol/2018 For Assessment Year 2011-12 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.1880/Kol/2018 – The Revenue In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

sections 92A to 92F of the Act and rules. 10A to 10E of the Rules and also maintained necessary information and documentation in support thereof. However from the SCN issued by the Ld. TPO as well as his impugned order, I find that no ground whatsoever has been set out for rejecting the TP analysis performed by the appellant. Such