Section 10(25) Income Tax Act (2025: s.11) — Case Laws

Itw India Superannuation Fund, Gurgaon vs. DCIT., Exemption Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 37/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri M. Surya Kiran, ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Raja Kumar, DR

Section 10(25)Section 154

La Martiniere Providend Fund., Kolkata vs. ITO, Exemption, Ward-1(4), Kolkata.

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

ITA 856/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.856/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2018-19 La Martiniere Provident Fund………………………….…………....Appellant 11, Dr. U.N. Brahmachari Street, Kolkata – 700017. [Pan: Aaatl2603A] Vs. Ito, Exemption Ward-1(4), Kolkata…...............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri B. K. Singh, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 01, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 08, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.07.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Lower Authorities In Denying The Exemption Claimed By The Assessee U/S 10(25) Of The Act. 3. The Contention Of The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Been That The Assessee Is A Provident Fund Duly Recognised By The Commissioner Of Income Tax. However, The Lower Authorities Have Rejected The Claim Of The Assessee For Exemption U/S 10(25) Of The Act On The Ground That The Assessee Has Not Furnished Recognition Certificate Issued By The

Section 10(25)Section 250

Pioneer Steels Employees Group Gratuity Fund, Coimbatore vs. Additional/ Joint/ Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 457/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Sandyaarti, CAFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl.CIT

Section 10(25)Section 143(3)

Cochin Refineries Limited Staff Provident Fund, Ambalamughal vs. ACIT, Kochi

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

ITA 10/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Cochin Refineries Limited Staff Vs. Acit, Provident Fund, Exemption Circle, Kochi Refinery P. B. No.2, Kochi. Ambalamugal – 682 302, Kerala. Pan : Aaatc 1545 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Radhesh L Bhatt, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr AR

Section 10(25)Section 17(3)Section 77(5)

Iecs Limited Employee Pf Covered Under Fps, New Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 8503/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Deepashree Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Senior DR

Section 10(25)Section 10(25)(ii)Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 17(1)

M/S the Moran Tea Co. (India) Ltd. Employees'S Gratuity Fund, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-36(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 2265/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10Section 10(25)Section 10(25)(iv)Section 143(2)Section 3G