PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

charitable trusts, which were disallowed in terms of Explanation 2 to section 37(1), but alternatively claimed u/s 80G of the Act. The AO disallowed the same stating that the CSR donations were not voluntary in nature and hence would not qualify for deduction u/s 80G of the Act. On appeal, the Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata has allowed the same

PCBL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

charitable trusts, which were disallowed in terms of Explanation 2 to section 37(1), but alternatively claimed u/s 80G of the Act. The AO disallowed the same stating that the CSR donations were not voluntary in nature and hence would not qualify for deduction u/s 80G of the Act. On appeal, the Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata has allowed the same

PRAMOD LAKRA,DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

charitable trusts, which were disallowed in terms of Explanation 2 to section 37(1), but alternatively claimed u/s 80G of the Act. The AO disallowed the same stating that the CSR donations were not voluntary in nature and hence would not qualify for deduction u/s 80G of the Act. On appeal, the Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata has allowed the same

PRAMOD LAKRA,DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILIPS CARBON BLACK LTD , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

charitable trusts, which were disallowed in terms of Explanation 2 to section 37(1), but alternatively claimed u/s 80G of the Act. The AO disallowed the same stating that the CSR donations were not voluntary in nature and hence would not qualify for deduction u/s 80G of the Act. On appeal, the Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata has allowed the same

KOLKATA METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RANGE - 50,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 723 & 724/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- C.I.T.-Xvii, Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 523 & 524/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- J.C.I.T., Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Of Assessee For The Respondent : Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2017

148 on 30.3.2010 as stated supra. Admittedly, the objects and activities of the trust had remained the same in preceding assessment years also i.e Asst Years 2003-04 to 2008-09. Though this first proviso to section 12A(2) talks about pendency of assessment proceedings, it is relevant to get into the definition of the term 'assessment' in section

KOLKATA METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RANGE - 50,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 723 & 724/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- C.I.T.-Xvii, Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 523 & 524/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- J.C.I.T., Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Of Assessee For The Respondent : Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2017

148 on 30.3.2010 as stated supra. Admittedly, the objects and activities of the trust had remained the same in preceding assessment years also i.e Asst Years 2003-04 to 2008-09. Though this first proviso to section 12A(2) talks about pendency of assessment proceedings, it is relevant to get into the definition of the term 'assessment' in section

SRI RAMKRISHNA SAMITY,SILIGURI vs. D.C.I.T.CIR - 2,SILIGURI, SILIGURI

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

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

148 of the Act was issued by the DCIT, Circle 2 Siliguri for the Asst Years 2003-04 to 2008- 09 on 30.3.2010. Even for the earlier years , the assessee society was carrying on the same charitable objects as per the trust deed on which fact also there is absolutely no dispute. The receipts were brought to tax only

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

148 itself. 4) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) acted arbitrarily in not admitting the appeal by distorting the facts on record that the assessee had petitioned to withdraw the appeal, in spite of the fact that he himself reported to the Ld. CIT-XX that the appeal was under process

M/S SIKAR ZILLA WELFARE TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm M/S Sikar Zilla Welfare Income Tax Officer, Trust Ward 1(3), Exempt 1A, Sikar Bhawan, Vs. Ashutosh Dey Lane, Kolkata-400071 Kolkata-700006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadts3808D Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Gautam Patra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.08.2024

148, the approach in the cases of the present type should be equitious, balancing and judicious. Technically, strictly and liberally speaking, Respondent No.1 might be justified in denying the exemption by rejecting such condonation application, but an assessee, a public charitable trust with almost over thirty years, which otherwise satisfies the condition for availing such exemption, should not be denied

ITO, (E) -II, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DEBI KAMAL ESTATE TRUST, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue on ground No

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.862/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2004-05) Ito(E)-Ii Vs. Debi Kamal Estate Trust, Kolkata 5Th , 10B, 7, Queens Park, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700020 Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatd 7600 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

Section 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) dated, 09.07.2009 2 Co.No.68/Kol/2013 Debi Kamal Estate Trust 2. Brief facts of the case qua the assessee are that the assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2004-05 on dated 31.03.2005 declaring total income at Nil. The Return of income

SUBHAS HARILAL DOSHI CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narsimha Charysubhas Harilal Doshi बनाम Cit(Exemp.) Kolkata Charitable Trust, C/O. 10, Middleton Row, / V/S. S.L. Kochar, Advocate, Kolkata 86, Canning Street, Kolkata-700 001 [Pan No.Aaets 1899 P] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

148 of the Act and assessment was framed u/s 147/144 of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the statement of the Managing Trustee(s) and Shri J.K. Jain was also recorded. The AO during assessment proceedings also observed that the activity of the society was negligible and accordingly the assessment was framed after making the addition

DCIT(E),CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL TRADE PROMOTION ORG., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

148 on 30.3.2010 as stated supra. Admittedly, the objects and activities of the trust had remained the same in preceding assessment years also i.e Asst Years 2003-04 to 2008-09. Though this first proviso to section 12A(2) talks about pendency of assessment proceedings, it is relevant to get into the definition of the term ‘assessment’ in section

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)

148 on 30.3.2010 as stated supra. Admittedly, the objects and activities of the trust had remained the same in preceding assessment years also i.e Asst Years 2003-04 to 2008-09. Though this first proviso to section 12A(2) talks about pendency of assessment proceedings, it is relevant to get into the definition of the term ‘assessment’ in section

ACIT, CC-2(1), KOL, KOLKATA vs. SHALIMAR HATCHERIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,......................Respondent 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, 17Th Floor, Everest House, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] - A N D - C.O. No. 13/Kol/2023 (In I.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,..................Cross Objector 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

148 on 05.11.2015. The ld. Assessing Office has reopened the assessment on the strength of information received from the Director (Investigation), Kolkata exhibiting the fact that assessee is a beneficiary of alleged bogus donation given by it. On scrutiny of the accounts, it revealed to the assessee that it has given a donation of Rs.7,00,000/- to M/s. Horticulture

JERMEL'S ACCADEMY,SILIGURI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(4), , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the directions mentioned above

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Charitable Trust vs. Income-tax Officer [2023] 156 taxmann.com 270 (Bangalore - Trib.)/[2023] 203 ITD 641 (Bangalore - Trib.)[26-09-2023] 8.1 In the case of Genius Education Society (supra) the Hon'ble Tribunal has held as under: “■ Admittedly, the reopening in the instant case was resorted to for the reason that the assessee had been refused approval under section

SRIJAN CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ITO(EXEMPTION) WARD 1(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Srijan Charitable Trust, Income Tax Officer 36/1 A, Srijan House, Elgin (Exemption) Road, Bhawanipur, Vs. Ward 1(3), Kolkata Kolkata-700020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahts4903K Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.09.2025

Charitable Trust; A.Y. 2011-12 processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 01.02.2013. Thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148

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

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