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

charitable trusts which have been approved under section 80G(6)(vi) and unlike sub-clauses (iiihk) and (iiihi), there is no restriction or prohibition set out in the said sub-clause denying deduction under section 80G for CSR contributions. [Para 13]” 7.2. It is further noticed that CSR expenditure is an obligation of the company specified in section

JAN PRIYA TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.(EXEMPTION)-1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jan Priya Trust Vs. Income-Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward- (Pan: Aaatj0335M) 1(1), Kolkata.

Trust Vs. ACIT (exemption) (2018) 62 ITR (Trib.) (2018) 264 (ITAT Bangalore) wherein it was held as under: “3.4.3 The issue to be decided by us is as to whether for the purpose of accumulation of income for application for charitable purposes under section

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

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

264 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata - xx, inter alia, for the assessment year 2004-05 holding that even the interest on fixed deposit was not taxable. d) We were granted registration under section 12AA of the Act with effect from April 1, 2004. (e) Our very first assessment for the assessment year 2004-05, for which return

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

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

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

DCIT(EXAMPTION), CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MAA SARASWATI GYAN MANDIR EDUCATION SOCIETY , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2002/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit(Exemption), Circle- Vs. Maa Saraswati Gyan Mandir 1(1), Kolkata

264 ITR.110. The said issue was also discussed by Hon`ble Madras High Court in the case of Govindu Naicker Estate Vs CIT reported in 248 ITR 368. The said judgment was also followed by the Chennai Bench of 1TAT in the case of Mariamman Educational Health and Charitable Trust in ITA No. 142, 143/Mad/20l0. We note that

M/S CALCUTTA CRICKET & FOOTBALL CLUB,KOLKATA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 466/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Calcutta Cricket & Football Club -Vs.- I.T.O., Exemption-I, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaccc 6337 P] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Advocate & Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2016. Date Of Pronouncement : 05.08.2016. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

264 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata - XX, inter alia, for the assessment year 2004-05 holding that even the interest on fixed deposit was not taxable. 4 M/s. Calcutta Cricket & Football Club. A.Yr.2011-12 (iii) Grant of registration under section 12AA of the Act with effect from 1st April 2004. (iv) The first assessment

M/S INTEGRATED EDUCATION RESEARCH CENTRE FOR ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is allowed while the stay application is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M.Balaganesh

264 ITR 110 {Mumbai} [2004] ii. CIT Vs. Market Committee, Pipli reported in 330 ITR 16 (Punjab & Haryana) [2011 ] iii. CIT vs. Trustee of H.E.H. Nizam's Supplemental Religious Endowment Trust reported in 127 ITR 378 (A.P.) [1981] iv. ClT vs. Rcao Bahadur Calavala Cunnan Chetty Charities reported in [1982) 135 ITR 485 [Mad} v. ClT vs. Bhoruka Public Welfare

SMITA S MEHTA,KOLKATA vs. ASST DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Charitable Trust v. Union of India [1992] 193 ITR 95 (Delhi). In Circular No. 581 (see [1990] 186 ITR (St.) 2) dated September 28, 1990, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, it has been said that the scope of the powers to make prima facie adjustments under Section 143(1)(a) is "somewhat coterminous with the power

PARAMARTH SADHAK SANGH ,KOLKATA vs. ADIT(E) CIR -2/NOW ITO(EXEM), WARD - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Paramarth Sadhak Sangh……..………………....…………..……………...……..….…….........Appellant P-113, New Raipur Road (E) Kolkata – 700 084 [Pan : Aaatp 4767 F] Vs. Adit (E), Circle-2/ Now I.T.O. (Exem), Ward-14, Kolkata….……………............Respondent

Charitable Trust v. Union of India [1992] 193 ITR 95, the hon'ble Delhi High Court held that as per the provisions of section 143(1) (a) of the Act the Assessing Officer could allow or disallow only such claims which were admissible/inadmissible on the basis of the returns and documents accompanying the return. It was also held that

SAMPAT MAL PARAKH,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Charitable Trust -vs.-\nDCIT (2006) 280 ITR 357 (Mad). The brief facts of the case are that\naggrieved by the order of CIT(Appeals), the assessee preferred an\nappeal before the Appellate Tribunal with a petition to condone the\ndelay of 38 days in filing the appeal. The Appellate Tribunal\ndismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. On an appeal