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

section 12A(2) of the Act cannot be held to be retrospective in nature and hence cannot be applied for the Asst Years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The ld AR argued that the issue under dispute is already settled by the following decisions of the co-ordinate benches of various tribunals :- A.Yrs.2006-07 & 2007-08 a) Decision

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

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

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

2(15) of the Income Tax Act.” 6 7 ITA Nos.489-495/Kol/2016 Dreamland Education Society A.Yrs.2005-06 to 2011-12 10. Thereafter the AO found that the assessee did not enjoy registration u/s 12A of the Act nor was there any notification allowing exemption u/s 10(23C) of the Act. The AO was therefore of the view that the assessee

BIMAL KUMAR DROLIA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-43(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

2(12A) as existed for assessment year 2009-10 includes ledgers, day-books, cash books, account books and other books, whether kept in the written form or as printouts of data stored in a floppy, disc, tape or any other form of electromagnetic data storage device. It is viewed that based on this definition read with the answers to various

ANJANA CHAUDHURY,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CIR. (1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 2(12A) of the Act and hence, it needs to be clearly pin-pointed whether at all the preliminary requirement u/s 68

SATYAM SUREKA ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-3(3), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the different assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] I.T.(S.S).A. No. 13 /Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 Satyam Sureka Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata

section 56(2) and it was not registered u/s 12A or 12AA of the Act.” 12 IT(S.S)A Nos. 13,14 & 15/Kol/2025 I.T.A. No. 152/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15&2015-16 Satyam Sureka & Ors. 12. Aggrieved by the said order the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee

SREEMA MAHILA SAMITY,NADIA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-NADIA, NADIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 2(15) of the Act, which came into force from A.Y 2009-10, applicable to the year under consideration held that the money lending business and earning interest thereon is an income and facts in the advancement of any other object general public utility and it shall not be a charitable purpose and added the excess income over

INDIAN COAL AGENCY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-35, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as per the discussion supra

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 12AA(3) of the Act w.e.f. 01.10.2004. 8. We hold that the ratio decidendi of the aforesaid judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court would squarely be applicable to the facts of the instant case. Infact the assessee’s case herein falls on a much better footing than the facts before the Hon’ble Apex Court

INDIAN COAL AGENCY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-35, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as per the discussion supra

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 12AA(3) of the Act w.e.f. 01.10.2004. 8. We hold that the ratio decidendi of the aforesaid judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court would squarely be applicable to the facts of the instant case. Infact the assessee’s case herein falls on a much better footing than the facts before the Hon’ble Apex Court

PANCHI BIBI WAKF ESTATE,KOLKATA vs. DDIT (E)-II, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 11(4A) of the Act has to be considered in the context of difference between property held in favour of assessee-trust and profit arisen to assessee-trust out of business. This Sec. 11(4A) of the Act is not applicable in the instant case as the property is held in assessee-trust. The GA was always

M/S ADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RG-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1281 /Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11

68[ 2011];] 69[ 69a [(vi ) any undertaking carrying on the business of laying and operating a cross-country natural gas distribution network, including pipelines and storage facilities being an integral part of such network, which fulfils the following conditions, namely:— (a ) it is owned by a company registered in India or by a consortium of such companies

M/S. DELIGHTED HOLDINGS (P) LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIR, CIR-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 68, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises; the appeals are accordingly dismissed" 8. Applying the proposition of law laid down in the case law to the facts of the case, we delete the addition made u/s 68 of the Act for the reasons cited above.” 12. Under identical circumstances, similar view was taken

SUPER IRON FOUNDRY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 36, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav(Kz)& Shri Rajesh Kumar]

68 of the Act. Fortunately, for the assessee, CIT(A) has done an elaborate factual exercise, took into consideration, the creditworthiness of the 13 companies the details of which were furnished by the assessee. More importantly, the CIT noted that all these companies responded to the notices issued under Section 133 (6) of the Act which fact

SATISH KUMAR LAKHMANI,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"ी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. टी. वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

12A. read with section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 are predicate offences. • Enforcement Directorate should then be informed to take action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act for the predicate offences. 5.6.1 On perusal of the records available, it is found that the scrip of 'UNNO INDUSTRIES LTD is amongst the 84 penny

RITIN LAKHMANI,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 10 , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

12A. read with section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 are predicate offences. • Enforcement Directorate should then be informed to take action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act for the predicate offences. 5.6.1 On perusal of the records available, it is found that the scrip of 'UNNO INDUSTRIES LTD is amongst the 84 penny

REETA LAKHMANI,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 10 , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

12A. read with section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 are predicate offences. • Enforcement Directorate should then be informed to take action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act for the predicate offences. 5.6.1 On perusal of the records available, it is found that the scrip of 'UNNO INDUSTRIES LTD is amongst the 84 penny

PRAVESH KUMAR LAKHMANI ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 10 , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

12A. read with section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 are predicate offences. • Enforcement Directorate should then be informed to take action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act for the predicate offences. 5.6.1 On perusal of the records available, it is found that the scrip of 'UNNO INDUSTRIES LTD is amongst the 84 penny

RACHIT LAKHMANI ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 10, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

12A. read with section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 are predicate offences. • Enforcement Directorate should then be informed to take action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act for the predicate offences. 5.6.1 On perusal of the records available, it is found that the scrip of 'UNNO INDUSTRIES LTD is amongst the 84 penny

JAIKISHAN LAKHMANI ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 10 , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

12A. read with section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 are predicate offences. • Enforcement Directorate should then be informed to take action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act for the predicate offences. 5.6.1 On perusal of the records available, it is found that the scrip of 'UNNO INDUSTRIES LTD is amongst the 84 penny

GOPICHAND LAKHMANI ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 10, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

12A. read with section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 are predicate offences. • Enforcement Directorate should then be informed to take action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act for the predicate offences. 5.6.1 On perusal of the records available, it is found that the scrip of 'UNNO INDUSTRIES LTD is amongst the 84 penny