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.

95 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 2(22)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai582Delhi572Karnataka468Chennai360Bangalore305Ahmedabad209Jaipur166Hyderabad108Kolkata95Chandigarh90Pune89Lucknow64Cuttack50Indore44Amritsar44Visakhapatnam43Cochin40Nagpur28Rajkot27Allahabad27Surat26Calcutta17Raipur16Telangana15Jodhpur15Agra13SC12Dehradun7Patna6Ranchi6Kerala5Varanasi5Punjab & Haryana5Panaji4Rajasthan3Andhra Pradesh2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Guwahati1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 12A113Section 234E90Section 80G77Section 1151Section 200A48Exemption45Section 26335Section 143(3)35Section 80G(5)30

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

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

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

E) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority(supra) and submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has discussed the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Act in number of trusts and differentiated the GPU activity and business activity and provided general test u/s 2(15) of the Act. The Ld. A.R submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has also

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

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

Showing 1–20 of 95 · Page 1 of 5

Deduction30
Addition to Income23
Disallowance17
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

E) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority(supra) and submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has discussed the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Act in number of trusts and differentiated the GPU activity and business activity and provided general test u/s 2(15) of the Act. The Ld. A.R submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has also

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)

e) were merely powers incidental to the carrying out of that dominant and primary purpose; (ii) That the dominant or primary purpose of the promotion of commerce and trade in art silk, etc., was an object of public utility not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit within the meaning of s.2(15) and that the assessee

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

e) were merely powers incidental to the carrying out of that dominant and primary purpose; (ii) That the dominant or primary purpose of the promotion of commerce and trade in art silk, etc., was an object of public utility not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit within the meaning of s.2(15) and 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

ITA 1228/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

e) were merely powers incidental to the carrying out of that dominant and primary purpose; (ii) That the dominant or primary purpose of the promotion of commerce and trade in art silk, etc., was an object of public utility not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit within the meaning of s.2(15) and 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

ITA 1229/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

e) were merely powers incidental to the carrying out of that dominant and primary purpose; (ii) That the dominant or primary purpose of the promotion of commerce and trade in art silk, etc., was an object of public utility not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit within the meaning of s.2(15) and 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

ITA 1230/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

e) were merely powers incidental to the carrying out of that dominant and primary purpose; (ii) That the dominant or primary purpose of the promotion of commerce and trade in art silk, etc., was an object of public utility not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit within the meaning of s.2(15) and that the assessee

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 906/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

e) were merely powers incidental to the carrying out of that dominant and primary purpose; (ii) That the dominant or primary purpose of the promotion of commerce and trade in art silk, etc., was an object of public utility not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit within the meaning of s.2(15) and that the assessee

M/S JMS MINING PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 146/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri P. M .Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 135Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 37Section 80G

charitable trust u/s 80G(2)(iv) read with Section 80G(1)(ii) of the Act. 23. As discussed supra, we concur with the contention of the assessee that since Parliament intended certain restrictions to only CSR expenditure in respect of two donations included by an assessee as CSR expenditure i.e. [Swachh Bharat Kosh and Clean Ganga Fund] has impliedly

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

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

ITA 1031/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

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 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)

charitable purposes, which is of the nature referred to in s. 11(4A), tax shall be charged on so much of the relevant income as is not exempt under s. 11. Sec. 164(2) was reintroduced by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989, w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. Earlier it was omitted by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment

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

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, the assessee has claimed deduction

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

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, the assessee has claimed deduction

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

ITA 597/KOL/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Apr 2017

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

Section 12Section 12ASection 132

2) The activities of the Trust or Institution are not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the Trust or Institution. Only if the Commissioner is satisfied that any one of these conditions exists, then he shall pass an order in writing cancelling the registration of such Trust or Institution. M/s.Jagannath Gupta Family Trust 7 Therefore what follows

GOLDEN SAND TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1815/KOL/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Mar 2017

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: “1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 11oSection 12ASection 80G

section 12A and 80 G registration and continued to be assessed as a charitable organization consistently by the Revenue. However, it appears from the show cause notice (SCN) issued by the Ld CIT dated 3.3.2016 that some information was received by him as per which donation of Rs.70 Lacs received by the appellant during F.Y. 2011-12 from Society

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

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 156/KOL/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jul 2018AY 2011-2012

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]

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 147Section 148Section 25

22. Thus the relevant clause defining income in section 2(24)(iia) as introduced with effect from 1.4.1973 was clearly not intended to cover contributions / donations received with a specific direction that they will form part of the corpus of the trust for utilization in acquisition / construction of a capital asset. Thus what is not income as per the definition

M/S. CALCUTTA CRICKET & FOOTBALL CLUB,KOLKATA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, WARD 1(1). KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1105/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 263

e) Our very first assessment for the assessment year 2004-05, for which return was filed under section 139(4A) claiming exemption under section 11, was made subject matter of proceedings under section 147 for the purpose of bringing to tax, the surplus of Rs.6,67,907/- (before deduction of expenses/overheads debited to the Income and Expenditure account in respect

PANDANDA CHEETHAMMA MADAPPA CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

The appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes”

ITA 456/KOL/2024[00]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 456/Kol/2024 Pandanda Cheethamma Madappa Charitable Trust,………………………………..…Appellant Apartment-3, 36, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan:Aabtp6350P] -Vs.- Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption),.Respondent Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S. Datta, Cit, D.R. Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 22, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 04, 2024 O R D E R

Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

22, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order: July 04, 2024 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata dated 11th February, 2024. 1 Pandanda Cheethamma Madappa Charitable Trust 2. The solitary grievance of the assessee

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

ITA 36/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri B. R. Dutta, CA, Shri Saurabh Bagaria, Advocate & Shri RiteshFor Respondent: Shri I. Jamir, CIT, Sr. DR & Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 144Section 25

22. Thus the relevant clause defining income in section 2(24)(iia) as introduced with effect from 1.4.1973 was clearly not intended to cover contributions / donations received with a specific direction that they will form part of the corpus of the trust for utilization in acquisition / construction of a capital asset. Thus what is not income as per the definition

SREEMA MAHILA SAMITY,NADIA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-NADIA, NADIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2826/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2017AY 2009-2010
For Appellant: S/Shri K.M. Roy &For Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2

2(15), where the purpose of the trust/institution is relief of the poor, education or medical relief it will constitute ‘charitable purpose even if it incidentally involves the carrying on of commercial activities’ as per CBDT Circular No.11/2008 dt. 19-12-08. The CIT-A failed to understand the restriction of the amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- in relation

ACIT, CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. M.K. SHAH EXPORTS LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appealof the Revenue (ITA No

ITA 1974/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1903/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 020. Kolkata – 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1974/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. M. K. Shah Exports Ltd. A.C.I.T, Circle-4(1), Kolkata Vs. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, 2/2. Justice Dwarkanath Road, Kolkata – 700 069. Kolkata – 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccm 0884 H (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By :Shrisaurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit (Sr. Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2018

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: ShriSaurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80GSection 92C

E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The captioned two appeals filed by the Assessee and Revenue, pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14, is directed against an order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 22, Kolkata, dated 29.06.2017,which in turn arises out of fair assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read