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

10A seeking registration u/s 12AA of the Act and accordingly the order u/s 12AA was passed by the learned Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) , Kolkata on 9.7.2012 granting registration initially from 1.4.2012 later modified vide corrigendum dated 13.12.2012 stating that the same is effective from 1.4.2011. In effect, the assessee is registered u/s 12AA of the Act with effect from

DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the ground nos. 8 & 9 in ITA No. 451/Kol/2013 raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganeshita No. 1622/Kol/2011 A.Y 2008-09

10A/ 10B/ 80IA / 80IB. To justify the imposition, real income theory was stressed and it was held that the companies cannot be allowed to have two faces, one for shareholder and another for taxman. Section 115JA was enacted by restructuring the provisions of section 115J with certain minor changes and thereafter section 115JB was enacted by bringing minor changes

SRIVIDYA RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

condonation of delay in the matter. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed on the point of limitation, without any decision on the merits of the case. 5.1. However, before parting with this issue it is observed that the appellant’s case is squarely covered by CBDT Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 which affords an opportunity to the appellant to approach

SRIVIDYA RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

condonation of delay in the matter. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed on the point of limitation, without any decision on the merits of the case. 5.1. However, before parting with this issue it is observed that the appellant’s case is squarely covered by CBDT Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 which affords an opportunity to the appellant to approach

SALT LAKE SANSKRITIK SANSAD ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 40/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-2024 Salt Lake Sanskritik Sansad,…………...……Appellant Sector-1, Trust Bhawan, Ca-49, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700064, West Bengal [Pan:Aaets4162K] -Vs.- Deputy Director Of Income Tax,................Respondent Circle Cpc, Bengaluru, Prestige Alpha, Post Bag No. 2, Electronic City Post, Hosur Road, Bangalore-560 100, Karnataka Appearances By: Shri N. Kausic, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: April 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 30, 2025 O R D E R

2 of section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee-Society also submitted statutory audit report on 31.10.2023 prescribed Form No. 10BB specifying a sum of Rs.1,32,36,648/- as income required to be applied in India by the appellant during the previous year. The assesee-Society also filed return of income on 14.11.2023 under section

DCIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS (I), LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objections of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2014-15

2) wherein the TPO had inter alia examined the profitability of the Centply Unit. Upon verification of the inter-unit transactions conducted by the assessee, covered by Section 80IA(8) & (10) of the Act, the TPO did not find the profitability of the Unit to be excessive and accordingly no adjustment was proposed in the transfer pricing order passed

D.C.I.T CC - XXIII,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S SINGHAL ENTERPRISES PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal of Revenue stand allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

condone the delay occurred in filing the income tax return. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the AO. On the other hand the ld. AR filed a paper book which is running from pages 1 to 77 and submitted that there was some dispute with regard to the partition of the family property, so the delay occurred which

AKHIL BHARATVARSHIYA CH KSH MAHASABHA,KOLKATA vs. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE (CPC), , BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 380/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-2023 Akhil Bharatvarshiya Ch Ksh Mahasabha,..Appellant C/O. Agarwal Vishwanath & Associates, 133/1/1A, S.N. Banerjee Road, Pushkal Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700013, West Bengal [Pan:Aaaaa8373R] -Vs.- Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc),……...Respondent Bengaluru, Income Tax Department, Post Box No. 1, Electronic City Post Office, Bengaluru-560100 Appearances By: Shri Deep Agrawal, A.R. & Shri Subhankar Ghosh, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

2) That the Ld. C1T(A) erred in law and in fact by failing to consider that the delay in filing Form 10A for re-registration under section 12AB was inadvertent and beyond the control of the appellant, given that the appellant is a public charitable trust run by laypersons with limited knowledge of tax procedures. Further

NITDAA FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. CIT(E), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishranitdaa Foundation, Commissioner Of Income Fe 261, Sector-Iii, Salt Lake, Tax (Exemption), Kolkata, Vs West Bengal -700106 10B, Middleton Row, (Pan: Aadtn2308K) West Bengal - 700071 (Appellant) (Respondent)

delay of 79 days may kindly be condoned by Your Honour and our Appeal be decided on merits in the interest of justice.” 7. The assessee was also required to inform whether any approval was granted under section 12AA or under section 80G of the Act earlier, in response to which, the Ld. AR filed a copy of the order

AGARWAL SABHA ,ULUBARI, GUWAHATI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraagarwal Sabha, Cit (Exemption), Kolkata, H.No. 92A, Saratkunj 10B, Middleton Road, Apartment, Mill Road, Ulubari, Vs Kolkata - 700071 Guwahati (Pan: Aalaa5893M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

10A for provisional registration hence rejection is not as per law. 3 CIT(Exemption) has erred in rejecting the condonation of delay in filing form 10AB stating that the delay in filing of the application cannot be condoned by it. 2 Agarwal Sabha 4 The learned CIT(Exemption) is not justified in cancelling the provisional certificate issued to the assessee

DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas Appeals of the revenue are dismissed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.404/Kol/2015 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.625/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2011-12)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for hearing on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as facts narrated in ITA No. 625/Kol/2016

M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (I) PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas Appeals of the revenue are dismissed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.404/Kol/2015 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.625/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2011-12)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for hearing on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as facts narrated in ITA No. 625/Kol/2016

DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (I) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas Appeals of the revenue are dismissed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.404/Kol/2015 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.625/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2011-12)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for hearing on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as facts narrated in ITA No. 625/Kol/2016

RECKITT DENCKISER (INDIA) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas Appeals of the revenue are dismissed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.404/Kol/2015 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.625/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2011-12)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for hearing on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as facts narrated in ITA No. 625/Kol/2016

PANDAVESWAR COLLIERY EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

10A or in any of the provisions of Chapter VIA under the head e - the words “deductions in respect of certain income, previously which was provided as section 10AA, 80IA, 80IB, 80IC, 80ID or section 80IE of the Act were appearing.” 6. From perusal of the said amendment, we note that before 01.04.2021 there was no mechanism

ST. THOMAS SYRO MALABAR CATHOLIC CHURCH,KOLKATA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

2. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials\navailable on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and\ngenuine reasons and, hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate\nthe appeal.\n3.\nAt the time of hearing, the counsel of the assessee raised additional\nground which is extracted as under:-\n\"That on the facts and circumstances

A.C.I.T CIR - 1,HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY vs. M/S JAIRAM DISTRIBUTORS, HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S Viswanethra Ravi

condoned the delay in filing of return in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act, which stipulates the time limit of 30 days and even the reply is beyond that period. Once AO has acted upon the return there is no option except to issue notice u/s 143(2) of the Act for framing assessment even though this

PRAMEYA FOUNDATION,KAIKHALI BOINCHBERIA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraprameya Foundation, Cit (Exemption), Kolkata, Vill- Boinchberia, Po- Kaikhali Income Tax Office, 10B, Falta Boinchberia, Falta South, Vs Middleton Road, 24 Parganas - 743503 Kolkata - 700071 (Pan: Aadtp0927G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

2 Prameya Foundation Section 80G for final registration is beyond time limit prescribed under the referred Section without considering the effect of provisions of sub-Clause (iii) to first proviso of sub-Clause (5) to Section 80 G of the Act under which the only effective condition which is applicable in the current case for filling of such application

SRI MAHESWARI DHARMSALA,KOLKATA vs. CIT,(EXEMPTION),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. I.T.A. No.: 528/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: N.A. Sri Maheswari Dharmsala. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That the rejection of form 10AB is arbitrary and not justified as Assessee had filed form 10AB for Sec 12A within the extended due date