M/S S.KANEHIALALL LOHIA TRUST,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-1(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

section the income which is to be taken for purpose of accumulation is the income derived by the trust from property. If both the decisions are carefully read, it becomes evident that any expenditure which is in the shape of application of income is not to be taken into account. Having found that trust is entitled to exemption under

M/S S.KANEHIALALL LOHIA TRUST,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-1(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

section the income which is to be taken for purpose of accumulation is the income derived by the trust from property. If both the decisions are carefully read, it becomes evident that any expenditure which is in the shape of application of income is not to be taken into account. Having found that trust is entitled to exemption under

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

charitable trust running an educational institution and not engaged in any business activity so as to attract the provisions of section 44AB. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal.” III. ITA No. 2750/KOL/2025: “1. (a) For that the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have held that the penalty

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

charitable trust running an educational institution and not engaged in any business activity so as to attract the provisions of section 44AB. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal.” III. ITA No. 2750/KOL/2025: “1. (a) For that the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have held that the penalty

M/S DHAMEJA MINING,SIKKIM vs. ITO, WD-2(4), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

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

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Charitable Trust Vs WTO & Ors. (All) 222 ITR 523] b. Special Leave petition dismissed with speaking order is declaration of law by Supreme Court - After rejection of SLP, lower Courts can review its order - Once SLP is admitted, lower Courts have no jurisdiction to review the order [Kunhayammed & Ors. Vs State of Kerala