L & T FINANCE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80G of the Act in respect of amount paid to the charitable institution out of the amount meant for CSR activity. 4. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition so made by the Assessing Officer. 5. The sole issue before us is as to whether the amount paid by the assessee

L & T FINANCE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-5(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80G of the Act in respect of amount paid to the charitable institution out of the amount meant for CSR activity. 4. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition so made by the Assessing Officer. 5. The sole issue before us is as to whether the amount paid by the assessee

GOPSAI AVIANDAN SANGHA,PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. C.I.T.(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri A.T. Varkey

disallowances. 3. The ld. CIT(Exemptions), Kolkata rejected the application of the assessee for grant of registration under section 12AA of the Act on the following grounds:- A perusal of the records reveals that the assessee was registered under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act and the ld. Chief CIT-X, Kolkata vide his order dated

GOPSAI AVIANDAN SANGHA,PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. C.I.T.(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri A.T. Varkey

disallowances. 3. The ld. CIT(Exemptions), Kolkata rejected the application of the assessee for grant of registration under section 12AA of the Act on the following grounds:- A perusal of the records reveals that the assessee was registered under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act and the ld. Chief CIT-X, Kolkata vide his order dated

D.C.I.T CC - XXVIII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SPML INFRA LTD (ERSTWHILE M/S SUBHAS PROJECTS& MARKETING LTD), KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

5 on page 276) • Provision of septic tank/pit latrines at the construction site/camps (para 15.10 on page 286) • Provision of creches for working women labour (para 15.10 on page 286) • Drinking water (pg. 286) • Provision and maintenance of clean sanitary facilities on the site for use of its employees. (para 7 on page 276) • Watching and lighting (page 278, para

LUX FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ix) To start, establish and maintain schools or colleges or technical institutions etc. (x) To establish and maintain charitable hospitals, public health centre, and social up-lift centres. Lux Foundation Vs. CIT(E) Kol. Page 3 12. Since the assessee trust did not produce the books and vouchers in respect of expenses claimed by the society for verification

BINAYAK IMAGINE & DIAGNOSTIC PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 7(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

ix) Magnetic Resonance Imaging System x) Surgical Laser xi) Ventilators other than those used with anesthesia xii) Gamma Knife xiii) Bone marrow transplant equipment including silasticlogn standing intravenous catheters for chemotherapy 4 I.T.A. No.519/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Binayak Imaging & Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd. xiv) Fibreoptic endoscopes including Paediatricresectoscope/audit resectoscope, peritoneoscopes, Arthoscope, Microlaryngoscope, Fibreoptics Flexible Nasal Pharyngo Bronchoscope, Fibreoptic Flexible Laryngo