DCIT, MIDDLETONTON ROW vs. BISHNUPUR PUBLIC EDUCATION INSTITUTE, BISHNUPUR

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Bishnupur Public Education Institute Dcit 10B, Middleton Row, 5 Th Floor, Gopeswarpalli, Bishnupur, Vs. Kolkata-700071, West Bengal Bankura-722122, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtb4176D Assessee By : S/Shri S.M. Surana & Sunil Surana & Dipak Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

disallowance were carried out, those may be rectified. Hence, the CBDT itself accepted the position that even returns filed u/s.139 is to be accepted. It means that it has enlarged its scope of section 139 of the Act, which includes provisions of section 139(4) also. Here provision of section 139(4) w.e.f. 01.04.2017 lays down that any person

ONKAR SOCIETY FOR ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGICAL ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 2, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargshri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed 5% of the capital expenditure claimed. It was stated that the assessee is a society registered under section 12AA of the Act and running an educational institution. The income derived from the trust property had to be computed on commercial principles and the assessee placed reliance on Circular No. 5-P(LXX-6) of 1968. In the case

ORIENTAL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

disallowing application of income of Rs.66,67,929/- which was made out of income of the trust for the instant year on the ground that said income represent Capital gains and hence cannot be utilised for the purpose of charitable activities. The Ld. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata has erred in coming to conclusion that in terms of Section 11

THE GASPER EDUCATION SOCIETY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.871/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) The Gasper Education Society Vs Ito Ward-7 (1), Kolkata 40A, Ajc Bose Road, Nonapukur Tram Depot, Kolkata-700017 Pan No. :Aaabt 0159 K (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.03.2025 Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1074097940(1) For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Ld. Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld. Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Processed & The Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.143(3) Of The Act, Wherein The Assessing Officer Has Denied The Assessee The Benefit Of Sections 11 & 12 Of The Act On The Ground That The Return Filed By The Assessee Was U/S.139(4) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Also Confirmed The Order Of The Assessing Officer. Ld.Ar Drew Our Attention To The Circular Issued By The Cbdt In F.No.173/193/2019-Ita-

4) of the Act, benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act can't be denied to the assessee by invoking the provisions of Section 12A(1)(ba) of the Act. 13. In view of the above provisions of law, the clarificatory Circular of the CBDT as well as the judicial pronouncement, we are of the considered opinion that

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

Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80-IA of the Act 5.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, The Ld. AO and Hon'ble DRP erred in not granting the deduction claimed by the Assessee under section 80-IA of the Act amounting to Rs. 4,88,57,264 on the contention

M/S BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-9(1), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

11. Your appellant craves leave to add to, amend or alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” Grounds of appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17 “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP erred in affirming the action of Ld. AO in disallowing deduction claimed u/s 801A(4

M/S BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL./JOINT/DY./ASSTT. COMMISSIONER/ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

11. Your appellant craves leave to add to, amend or alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” Grounds of appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17 “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP erred in affirming the action of Ld. AO in disallowing deduction claimed u/s 801A(4

SIMPLEX KRITA JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Simplex Krita Jv Ito, Ward-33(1), Kolkata Simplex House, 27, Shakespeare Vs Sarani, Kolkata-700017. Pan: Aalas 5699 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal In Ita No. 181/Kol/2023 For A.Y. 2016-17 Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Ld. Cit In Short], Dated 25.01.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

disallowance of deduction of Rs.29,67,937/- u/s 80-IA(4) of the Act without considering that the activities of the appellant-JV were outside the purview of the Explanation below sec. 80-IA(13) of the Act and that the conditions for claiming deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act have been fully satisfied by the appellant-JV. 4

THE DCIT, CIR-3(2) GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED , GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P (2) (d) and held that the entire interest income of Rs. 2,59,49,002/-, was taxable as Income from Other Sources under section 56, as the assessee has failed to produce any evidence to show that it has incurred any expenditure wholly and exclusively to earn such interest income.” 3.3. During

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR-3(2), GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED, GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P (2) (d) and held that the entire interest income of Rs. 2,59,49,002/-, was taxable as Income from Other Sources under section 56, as the assessee has failed to produce any evidence to show that it has incurred any expenditure wholly and exclusively to earn such interest income.” 3.3. During

BIBHISANPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 27(4), HALDIA/ WBG-W-176(3), HALDIA

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

11 as under: "To say that the source of income is not relevant for deciding the applicability of section 80P would not be correct because one needs to give weightage to the words 'the whole of the amount of profits and gains of business' attributable to tope of the activities specified in section 80P(2)(a). The words the whole

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

disallowance of exemption under section 11 and 12 legally unsustainable. (4) That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on the facts and in law by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of M/s. Sterling Oil Resources (P) Ltd. Which is not squarely applicable in assessee's case as in the present case of the assessee, the assessee has not been allotted any shares against

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

11\nITA Nos.: 466, 622, 467, 623/KOL/2018 &\n1406, 1696, 1407, 1697/KOL/2019\nAYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15\nM/s. Coal India Ltd.\nwhich is disallowed as per provision of section 115JB of the Income Tax Act\nand added back to the book profit for computation of book profit u/s.H5JB.\nIn this regard the appellant has submitted that \"The Assessing Officer\nmerely

M/S. SETH B D GOYAL CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O. WARD - 1(3), EXEMPTION, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

4. For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of CPC Bangalore in disallowing the claim of exemption u/s 11 in the intimation u/s 143(1) for delay in filing audit report in Form 10B when there was no mismatch of data uploaded in the audit report and the data contained in the return of income which

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- V (I), KOLKATA vs. BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED, BIRLA BUILDING

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue is dismissed, as also the cross objection filed by the assessee for both the years

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

11,114/- could have been disallowed u/s 14A(1) of the Act and thus added back under clause (f) of Explanation to Section 115JB of the Act. The AO's action of adding back the disallowance computed under Rule 8D is also held to be unjustified in view of the decision of the Special Bench of Delhi ITAT

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

11 or 12) credited to the profit and loss account. 4.3 The provisions of subsection (2) & (3) of Section 14A which prescribe for estimated disallowance by the Assessing Officer do not find place in clause (f) of Section 115JB. Hence, no estimated disallowance as computed under subsection (2) & (3) for the purpose of Section 14A can be applied while making

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

11 or 12) credited to the profit and loss account. 4.3 The provisions of subsection (2) & (3) of Section 14A which prescribe for estimated disallowance by the Assessing Officer do not find place in clause (f) of Section 115JB. Hence, no estimated disallowance as computed under subsection (2) & (3) for the purpose of Section 14A can be applied while making