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.

67 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 38clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi489Karnataka465Mumbai404Bangalore186Chennai152Ahmedabad115Jaipur106Hyderabad76Kolkata67Pune59Chandigarh58Lucknow41Cochin36Allahabad31Cuttack29Indore26Visakhapatnam21Surat21Calcutta16Amritsar14Nagpur13Agra13Rajkot10Telangana9Kerala8Dehradun8SC7Jodhpur6Varanasi6Raipur4Patna4Rajasthan4Ranchi3Punjab & Haryana3T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Jabalpur1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 12A82Section 1158Section 2(15)33Exemption33Section 1029Section 26328Section 143(3)27Section 14A25Section 80G22Deduction

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

Trust 4 37. Sub-section (2) of section 11 states about a situation where eighty five per cent of the income referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) read with the Explanation to that sub-section is not applied, or is not deemed to have been applied, to charitable or religious purposes in India during

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 2024

Showing 1–20 of 67 · Page 1 of 4

19
Disallowance16
Addition to Income14
AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

38. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that in the given facts and detailed reading of the various judicial decisions through the years, interpreting the definition of “charitable purpose” as laid out in section 2(15) of the Act and also the definition of “business” in relation to the said section amply revels that

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)

38. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that in the given facts and detailed reading of the various judicial decisions through the years, interpreting the definition of “charitable purpose” as laid out in section 2(15) of the Act and also the definition of “business” in relation to the said section amply revels that

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)

38. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that in the given facts and detailed reading of the various judicial decisions through the years, interpreting the definition of “charitable purpose” as laid out in section 2(15) of the Act and also the definition of “business” in relation to the said section amply revels that

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)

38. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that in the given facts and detailed reading of the various judicial decisions through the years, interpreting the definition of “charitable purpose” as laid out in section 2(15) of the Act and also the definition of “business” in relation to the said section amply revels that

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

38. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that in the given facts and detailed reading of the various judicial decisions through the years, interpreting the definition of “charitable purpose” as laid out in section 2(15) of the Act and also the definition of “business” in relation to the said section amply revels that

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

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

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

38. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that in the given facts and detailed reading of the various judicial decisions through the years, interpreting the definition of “charitable purpose” as laid out in section 2(15) of the Act and also the definition of “business” in relation to the said section amply revels that

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

38. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that in the given facts and detailed reading of the various judicial decisions through the years, interpreting the definition of “charitable purpose” as laid out in section 2(15) of the Act and also the definition of “business” in relation to the said section amply revels that

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)

trust or the fact that it is conducting a hospital.” Thus from all the above it is seen that though the definition of “charitable” purpose under section 2(15) has undergone changes, the principle underlying the same has remained the same. In context of the above, with regard to the “principle of consistency” it would be of relevance here

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

ITA 2457/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

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

ITA 2034/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

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

ITA 2456/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

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

ITA 2458/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

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

ITA 2459/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

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

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

ITA 903/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

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.

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

section 12A of the Act and that the AO without assigning any reason has disallowed Rs.2,18,020/-, which was claimed by the assessee as Administrative & Establishment expenses which was included in the application of income u/s. 11 of the Act. We note that the issue as to whether the administrative and establishment expenses can be included as application

ACIT(EXEMPTIONS), CIR-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. HOOGHLY ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SOCIETY, HOOGHLY

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

ITA 1579/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1579/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Acit (Exemptions), Cir-1, Kolkata -Vs- Hooghly Engineering & Technology College Society [Pan: Aaah 2856 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri K.M. Roy, FCA
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(2)(a)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(cc)Section 143(3)

38,821/- as on 31.3.2009. The assessee had explained before the ld AO that the said payments were made to two trusts i.e PCSD and Lok Kendra Trust to enable them to set up their activities. The ld CITA had given a finding that the said payments represent only advances made by the assessee trust to two 4 5 Hooghly

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

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 u/s 80G of the Act of ₹69,25,000/- being 50% of the donation of such CSR expenses which according to the PCIT has rendered the assessment as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

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

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 u/s 80G of the Act of ₹69,25,000/- being 50% of the donation of such CSR expenses which according to the PCIT has rendered the assessment as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

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

In the result, both appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 415/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: : Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sellong Yaden, Addl CIT, ld.DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

trust or the fact that it is conducting a hospital.” Thus from all the above it is seen that though the definition of “charitable” purpose under section 2(15) has undergone changes, the principle underlying the same has remained the same. In context of the above, with regard to the “principle of consistency” it would be of relevance here

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

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

ITA 489/KOL/2016[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2005-2006

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

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 148Section 148(1)Section 249(4)

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