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

1)(b) and Rule 178,\nthe audit report was subsequently submitted before the Ld. AO\nduring the course of assessment proceedings.\n(d) The appellant has relied on the second proviso to section 12A(2)\nof the Act, which reads as under:\n\"Provided further that where registration has been granted to\nthe trust or institution under section 12AA

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

1)(b) and Rule 178,\nthe audit report was subsequently submitted before the Ld. AO\nduring the course of assessment proceedings.\n(d) The appellant has relied on the second proviso to section 12A(2)\nof the Act, which reads as under:\n\"Provided further that where registration has been granted to\nthe trust or institution under section 12AA

M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

161 taxmann.com 393 (Kolkata - Trib.)[14-12-2023]. Recently, the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Phillips Carbon Black Ltd. [2025] 175 taxmann.com 352 (Kolkata - Trib.)[10-06-2025] have held as under: “■ It is submitted that the reason given by the Assessing Officer for disallowing the deduction claimed under section

ITO(EXEMPTION),WARD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SURESH AMIYA MEMORIAL TRUST, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 12(1)(b) of the Act were violated. The Revenue has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd. [arising in SLP (Civil) No. 7620/2021] dated 11th July, 2022. The ld. CIT (A) allowed the relief to the assessee and the relevant extract from the order

AMIGOS PRASASTH PATH SOCIAL WELFARE SOCIETY,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1500 & 1501/Kol/2025 Amigos Prasasth Path Social Welfare Society.……….……….……….……Appellant 1 Ram Krishna Bagchi Lane, Beadon Street, Battala, Kol- 700006.. [Pan: Aajta7599P] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Both Dated 28.06.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Rejecting The Separate Applications Filed In Form 10Ab For Final Approval As Per The Provisions Of Sections 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) & 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arise From The Final Registration U/S 12A Of The Act Which Is Compulsory For Getting Subsequent Registration U/S 80G Of The Act Which Are Interconnected In Both The Appeals & Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. Ita No.1500/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

1. Baba Balaknath Seva Sansthan [2024] 167 taxman.com 716 (Jaipur-Trib.) 2. Pragati Education and Charitable Trust [2025] 175 taxman.com 896 (Ahmedabad-Trib.) 3. Institute of Indian Foundrymen vs. ITO [2024] 161 taxman.com 20 (Kol-Trib.) 4. Creative Museum Designers vs. ITO [2022] 145 taxman.com 27 (Gujarat) 4. Contrary to that, the ld. DR supports the impugned order. 5. Upon

AMIGOS PRASASTH PATH SOCIAL WELFARE SOCIETY,KOLKATA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1500 & 1501/Kol/2025 Amigos Prasasth Path Social Welfare Society.……….……….……….……Appellant 1 Ram Krishna Bagchi Lane, Beadon Street, Battala, Kol- 700006.. [Pan: Aajta7599P] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Both Dated 28.06.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Rejecting The Separate Applications Filed In Form 10Ab For Final Approval As Per The Provisions Of Sections 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) & 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arise From The Final Registration U/S 12A Of The Act Which Is Compulsory For Getting Subsequent Registration U/S 80G Of The Act Which Are Interconnected In Both The Appeals & Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. Ita No.1500/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

1. Baba Balaknath Seva Sansthan [2024] 167 taxman.com 716 (Jaipur-Trib.) 2. Pragati Education and Charitable Trust [2025] 175 taxman.com 896 (Ahmedabad-Trib.) 3. Institute of Indian Foundrymen vs. ITO [2024] 161 taxman.com 20 (Kol-Trib.) 4. Creative Museum Designers vs. ITO [2022] 145 taxman.com 27 (Gujarat) 4. Contrary to that, the ld. DR supports the impugned order. 5. Upon

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

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. If such income consists of severable portions, exempt

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

161 of 2013 dated 23.12.2013 also took identical view. The aforesaid two decisions by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court are binding on this Tribunal. Hence, we hold that the action of the AO in directly embarking on Rule 8D(2) of the rules was not proper and hence the disallowance under rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules

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

1) of the Act on 22nd August, 2018. The assessee claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Act but CPC denied the exemption because audit report on From10B was e-filed belatedly on 23rd March, 2020, i.e., after filing of income tax return. The assessee also filed a condonation petition under Section 119(2)(b) to learned Pr. Chief Commissioner

PATTON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Patton International Principal Commissioner Of Ltd., C/O Jain Vinod K & Income-Tax, Kolkata-1. Associates, 41A, A. J. C. Vs Bose Road, Diamond . Prestige Nirman, 6Th Floor, Suite No.613, Kolkata- 700017 (Pan: Aabcp7901M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Charitable Trust for which it was alleged that no certificate u/s. 80G and payment proof is found in the assessment record, Ld. Counsel referred to the relevant documents placed in the paper book. 3.2. In respect of Swarnim Foundation, certificate issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax (exemption), Kolkata u/s. 80G(5)(vi) of the Act has given an approval

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

Trust vs ITO reported in (2016) 68 taxmann.com 250 (Ahmedabad-Trib.) dated 22.2.2016. c) Decision of Cochin Tribunal in the case of SNDP Yogam vs Asst DIT (Exemption) reported in ( 2016) 161 ITD 1 (Coch-Trib.) dated 1.3.2016. d) Decision of Amritsar Tribunal in the case of St.Jude’s Convent School vs ACIT reported in (2017) 164 ITD 594 (Amritsar

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

Trust vs ITO reported in (2016) 68 taxmann.com 250 (Ahmedabad-Trib.) dated 22.2.2016. c) Decision of Cochin Tribunal in the case of SNDP Yogam vs Asst DIT (Exemption) reported in ( 2016) 161 ITD 1 (Coch-Trib.) dated 1.3.2016. d) Decision of Amritsar Tribunal in the case of St.Jude’s Convent School vs ACIT reported in (2017) 164 ITD 594 (Amritsar

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

VIVEKANANDA MATH,NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), EXEMPT,, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 12A(1)(b) of the Act, the AO denied the exemption u/s 11 and assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 3,58,34,330/-. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has also been dismissed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee

THE GOODHOPE FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-1(3) (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Rakesh Mishra]

Section 253 of the IT Act shall be within sixty days of the date of the service of the appellate order and in the case of the assessee the date of service being the 9th May, 2024, the time limit for filing of appeal has expired on 8th of July, 2024. 3. That the issue of the assessee was exemption

SHRI SANATAN DHARMA PANCHAYAT HIGH SCHOOL MANDAWA,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2026-27 Shri Sanatan Dharma Panchayat High School Mandawa….….……….……Appellant Block-A-11, 4Th Floor, 234/3A Ajc Bose Road, Kol - 700020. [Pan: Aaets8043F] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kadel, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 10, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 12, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey:

161 taxmann.com 209 (Madras). The ld. AR has submitted that when regular application for granting registration u/s 12A has been accepted by condoning the delay, and there being no change in the reasons cited in the condonation petition in granting regular registration u/s 80G of the Act, the ld. CIT(E) ought to have been considered the same likewise

LINDE GLOBAL SUPPORT SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

161 taxmann.com 393 (Kolkata-Tribunal) wherein the Co-ordinate Bench has held as under: “16. We have heard both the parties and perused the relevant provisions of the Act. It is noted that the provisions of Section 37 of the Act, which deals with allowability of expenses incurred in the course of and for the purposes of business, is applicable