What is Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. authority for?

Employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI, if paid by the assessee before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1), is an allowable deduction under section 43B. No distinction is drawn between employer's and employee's contributions for the purpose of section 43B.

How many judgments cite Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd.?

214 judgments on BharatTax cite Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396), spanning 2017 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 263, Section 133A, Section 142(1), Section 143(1), Section 147.

Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396)

Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru / I.T.O., Circle - 7(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 143/KOL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri P. R. Kothari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C(SMC)” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Assistant Director of Income Pvt. Ltd. Tax, CPC, Bengaluru. Vs. 58/5B, B. T. Road, Kolkjata- 700002. (PAN: AAKCS 3206 R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri P. R. Kothari, FCA Respondent by : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 23.06.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld…

Hemendra Nath Deka, Guwahati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 6/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati05 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka…………....…………....….........…..........….…… Appellant House No.6, Dolphin Security & Advertising, Kamakhya Temple Road, Kamakhya Gate, Guwahati-781009, Kamrup, Assam. [Pan: Ajupd3564F] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Ito, Ward-1(2), Guwahati)…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N. T. Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 05, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 09.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole & Common Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "गर"श अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka…………....…………....….........…..........….…… Appellant House no.6, Dolphin Security and Advertising, Kamakhya Temple Road, Kamakhya Gate, Guwahati-781009, Kamrup, Assam. [PAN: AJUPD3564F] vs. ACIT, CPC, Bengaluru (ITO, Ward-1(2), Guwahati)…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf o…

Hemendra Nath Deka, Guwahati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 5/GTY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati05 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka…………....…………....….........…..........….…… Appellant House No.6, Dolphin Security & Advertising, Kamakhya Temple Road, Kamakhya Gate, Guwahati-781009, Kamrup, Assam. [Pan: Ajupd3564F] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru (Ito, Ward-1(2), Guwahati)…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N. T. Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 05, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 09.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole & Common Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "गर"श अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos.5&6/Gau/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Hemendra Nath Deka…………....…………....….........…..........….…… Appellant House no.6, Dolphin Security and Advertising, Kamakhya Temple Road, Kamakhya Gate, Guwahati-781009, Kamrup, Assam. [PAN: AJUPD3564F] vs. ACIT, CPC, Bengaluru (ITO, Ward-1(2), Guwahati)…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf o…

First Choice Ready Mix, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-50(2), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees stand dismissed

ITA 612/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 First Choice Ready Mix................................................................……Appellant R No.2A&B, 2Nd Floor, Anandpur Sarachi Tower, E M Byepass Road, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. [Pan: Aadff9917A] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(2), Kolkata...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vigyaneshward Nath Datta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. I.T.A No.591/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratap Kundu...............................................................................……Appellant Jogipara, Bankura, P.O & Dist-Bankura, Pin-722101. [Pan: Amupk9918R] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Bankura...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. K. Sen, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 18, 2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘ए’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2018-19 First Choice Ready Mix................................................................……Appellant R No.2A&B, 2nd Floor, Anandpur Sarachi Tower, E M Byepass Road, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. [PAN: AADFF9917A] vs. ITO, Ward-50(2), Kolkata...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Vig…

Pratap Kundu, Bankura Jogipara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bankura

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees stand dismissed

ITA 591/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 First Choice Ready Mix................................................................……Appellant R No.2A&B, 2Nd Floor, Anandpur Sarachi Tower, E M Byepass Road, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. [Pan: Aadff9917A] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(2), Kolkata...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vigyaneshward Nath Datta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. I.T.A No.591/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratap Kundu...............................................................................……Appellant Jogipara, Bankura, P.O & Dist-Bankura, Pin-722101. [Pan: Amupk9918R] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Bankura...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. K. Sen, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 21, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 18, 2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘ए’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A No.612/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2018-19 First Choice Ready Mix................................................................……Appellant R No.2A&B, 2nd Floor, Anandpur Sarachi Tower, E M Byepass Road, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. [PAN: AADFF9917A] vs. ITO, Ward-50(2), Kolkata...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Vig…

Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru/ACIT, Circle - 7(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 61/KOL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A No.61/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd.................................................……Appellant 58/5B, B.T. Road, Kolkata-700002 [Pan: Aakcs3206R] Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru/ Acit, Circle-7(2), Kolkata….…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. R. Kothari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 13, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 16, 2023 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 30.11.2022 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 Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “For That On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Nfac Erred In Sustaining The Addition On Account Of Alleged Late Deposit Of Employee’S Contribution To Pf/Esi Etc. To The Extent Of Rs.792872/- Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer In Summary Assessment.”

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘एसएमसी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member I.T.A No.61/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2020-21 Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd.................................................……Appellant 58/5B, B.T. Road, Kolkata-700002 [PAN: AAKCS3206R] vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru/ ACIT, Circle-7(2), Kolkata….…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri P. R. Kothari, FCA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Res…

Nimbus Pipes Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 384/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Badaya (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri R.S. Meel (JCIT)

Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 384/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2019-20 cuke Nimbus Pipes Limited ACIT, Vs. E-35, RIICO Industrial Area Ext Circle-4, Jaipur. Bagru, Jaipur-303007. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AADCN 1836 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rohit Badaya (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@…

M/S. Suresh Electricals, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 724/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Suresh Electricals, Vs. Dcit, Ward No.25, Cmc T. S. No.227, Tilak Cpc, Nagar, Khb Colony, Bengaluru. Bellary – 583 101. Pan : Abyfs 9751 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. B. S. Balachandran, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Nfac, Delhi, Dated 12.07.2022, Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Page 2 Of 14

For Appellant: Shri. B. S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Suresh Electricals, Vs. DCIT, Ward No.25, CMC T. S. No.227, Tilak CPC, Nagar, KHB Colony, Bengaluru. Bellary – 583 101. PAN : ABYFS 9751 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. B. S. Balachandran, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 23.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi, dated 12.07.2022, relating to Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The only…

Bhoruka Fabcons Private Limited, Mysuru vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 910/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Bhoruka Fabcons Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, No.427E, Hebbal Industrial Area, Cpc, Mysuru – 570 016. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccb 9377 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Bhargava S. N, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Nfac, Delhi, Dated 28.07.2022, Relating To Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Calculated In The Prescribed Manner Under The Relevant Act. As Per Page 2 Of 13

For Appellant: Shri. Bhargava S. N, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2020-21 M/s. Bhoruka Fabcons Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, No.427E, Hebbal Industrial Area, CPC, Mysuru – 570 016. Bengaluru. PAN : AACCB 9377 N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Bhargava S. N, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 23.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi, dated 28.07.2022, relating to Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The…

Chase Security, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 796/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Chase Security, Vs. The Ito, No.16/A, 1St Floor, Millar Tank Bund Ward – 6(3)(1), Cpc, Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 052. Pan : Aaefc 2412 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sheethal Borkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 O R D E R This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 29.04.2021 By The Nfac, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Only Issue That Arises For Consideration In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Revenue Authorities Were Justified In Disallowing Payment Made To Esi/Pf Being Employees’ Share Of Contribution Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). 3. In This Regard, It Is Pertinent To Note That The Employee Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Was Promulgated To Provide For Such Institution Of Provident Funds, Pension Fund & Deposit-Linked Insurance Fund For Employees In Factories & Other Establishments. It Aims To Build Adequate Retirement Corpus For The Salaried Class Of Employees. The Fund Includes Contributions From The Employer & Employee Both, Page 2 Of 14

For Appellant: Smt. Sheethal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Chase Security, Vs. The ITO, No.16/A, 1st Floor, Millar Tank Bund Ward – 6(3)(1), CPC, Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 052. PAN : AAEFC 2412 L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Sheethal Borkar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 21.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 O R D E R This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order dated 29.04.2021 by the NFAC, Delhi relating to Assessment Year 201…

Rukmani Tea Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 457/KOL/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Oct 2022AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2020-21 Rukmani Tea Industries Pvt. Acit/Dcit, Circle- Ltd. 4(1), Kolkata Kasba Industrial Estate, Vs. Phase Ii, P-3, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. Pan: Aabcr 5257 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Sundeep Mukherjee, Ar Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Acit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.07.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A), Delhi Has Erred In Upholding The Contention Of The Ao/Cpc That Employee’S Contribution To Provident Fund For Rs. 25,02,607/- Made After Due Date But Before The Due Date For Filing Of Income Tax Return For The Assessment Year 2020-21 That Is Prior To Ay 2021- 22 Is Not Allowable U/S 43B Though Jurisdictional High Court & Other Courts Including The Apex Court Are Of Contrary View. 2. For That The Appellant Begs Leave To Add, Alter Or Amend Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Sundeep Mukherjee, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, ACIT, SR. DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “A(SMC)”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2020-21 Rukmani Tea Industries Pvt. ACIT/DCIT, Circle- Ltd. 4(1), Kolkata Kasba Industrial Estate, Vs. Phase II, P-3, East Kolkata Township, Kolkata-700107. PAN: AABCR 5257 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Sundeep Mukherjee, AR Respondent by : Shri Vijay Kumar, ACIT, SR. DR Date of Hearing : 10.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JM: The present appeal has been prefe…

Cleantech Management Services Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 357/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Oct 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.357/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Cleantech Management Services Pvt. Ltd.....................................…… ….Appellant 7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069. [Pan: Aaccc8816D] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(3), Kolkata .......….…..…...............................................….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Debajyati Bhattacharya, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 12, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 12, 2022 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 26.11.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Issued By The Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre U/S 250 Disallowing Employee Benefit Expenses Shall Be Treated Void Ab Initio. 2) For That The Order Issued U/S 250 Disallowing Expenditure Towards Employee Benefit, Be Treated As Void Ab Initio, Arbitrary & Bad In Law. 3) For That Order Passed By The Cit(A) Disallowing Rs.56,98,663 Is Disputed, Arbitrary & Bad In Law. 4) For That The Cit(A) Erred In Passing The Order Merely Considering Sec36(6R Of Part A -Oi) & Sec 37(7K Of Part-A-Oi) & Without Considering Sec -43B

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘सी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A No.357/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2018-19 Cleantech Management Services Pvt. Ltd.....................................…… ….Appellant 7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069. [PAN: AACCC8816D] vs. ITO, Ward-6(3), Kolkata .......….…..…...............................................….. Respondent Appearances by: Shri Debajyati Bhattacharya, FCA, appeared on behalf of the app…

Topsel Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 290/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.290/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Topsel Marketing Pvt. Ltd.............………......................................…… ….Appellant C/O M/S Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata. [Pan: Aaact8593J] Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Kolkata .......….…..…...............................................….. Respondent

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘सी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A No.290/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2017-18 Topsel Marketing Pvt. Ltd.............………......................................…… ….Appellant C/o M/s Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3rd Floor, Kolkata. [PAN: AAACT8593J] vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Kolkata .......….…..…...............................................….. Respondent Appearances by: Shri S. Jhajharia, AR, appe…

Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 244/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.243&244/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd……..…...........................................……Appellant 11A, 6Th Floor, Room No.2, Maharshi Devendra Road, P.O. Kolkata-700007. [Pan: Aagcs2173M] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Kolkata.......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 29, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 10, 2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since Identical Facts & Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals Hence The Same Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.1384/Kol/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Is Taken As The Lead Case. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law As Well As In Facts Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 8,53,593/- U/S 36(Va) When No Such Deduction Was Claimed By The Appellant In The Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit (A) Is Unlawful In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. Ao In Disallowing A Sum Of Rs. 8,53,593/- By Making Adjustment In Intimation U/S 143(1)(A) To The Returned Income When The Conditions Indicated In Clause (A) Of Section 143(1) For Adjustments Do Not Exist;

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘ए’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A Nos.243&244/Kol/2022 Assessment years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd……..…...........................................……Appellant 11A, 6th Floor, Room No.2, Maharshi Devendra Road, P.O. Kolkata-700007. [PAN: AAGCS2173M] vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata.......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf o…

Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 243/KOL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.243&244/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd……..…...........................................……Appellant 11A, 6Th Floor, Room No.2, Maharshi Devendra Road, P.O. Kolkata-700007. [Pan: Aagcs2173M] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Kolkata.......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 29, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 10, 2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since Identical Facts & Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals Hence The Same Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.1384/Kol/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Is Taken As The Lead Case. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law As Well As In Facts Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 8,53,593/- U/S 36(Va) When No Such Deduction Was Claimed By The Appellant In The Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit (A) Is Unlawful In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. Ao In Disallowing A Sum Of Rs. 8,53,593/- By Making Adjustment In Intimation U/S 143(1)(A) To The Returned Income When The Conditions Indicated In Clause (A) Of Section 143(1) For Adjustments Do Not Exist;

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘ए’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A Nos.243&244/Kol/2022 Assessment years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd……..…...........................................……Appellant 11A, 6th Floor, Room No.2, Maharshi Devendra Road, P.O. Kolkata-700007. [PAN: AAGCS2173M] vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata.......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf o…

Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 141/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.141/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited..........................................……Appellant Eco-Centre, 16Th Floor, Unit-1601, Block-Em04, Salt Lake City, Sector-V, Bidhannagar, North 24 Pgs, Kolkata- 700091. [Pan: Aabci0315E] Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bangalore .......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Indra, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 27, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 27, 2022 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 15.12.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That Cit (Nfac) Has Materially Erred In Law & Facets Of The Case In Disallowing Rs.22,94,560/- In Respect Of Esi & Pf Which Have Been Paid Before The Due Date Of Filing Income Tax Return. 2. For That Cit (Nfac) Has Materially Erred In Understanding Of The Applicability Of The Amended Explanations To Section 36(1)(Vb) & 43B As Introduced In The Finance Act 2021 Which Is Applicable In Prospective Assessment Year & Same Is Not At All Applicable In The Relevant Assessment Year I.E. Assessment Year 2017-18. 3. For That Assessee Reserves Its Right To Put Forth Further Ground/Grounds Of Appeal Before / At The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(vb)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘ए’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A No.141/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2017-18 Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited..........................................……Appellant Eco-Centre, 16th Floor, Unit-1601, Block-EM04, Salt Lake City, Sector-V, Bidhannagar, North 24 PGS, Kolkata- 700091. [PAN: AABCI0315E] vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore .......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearanc…

M/S, Madras Hydraulic Hose Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 702/CHNY/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Patna High Court in the case of Bihar State Warehousing Corp. Ltd. (88 Taxmann.com 455; 16.03.2016); Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand in CIT V/s Kicha Sugar Co. Ltd. (35 Taxmann.com 54; 20.05.2013); Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT V/s Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

Late Mr.Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj Rep by Legal Heir - Mr.Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 661/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Patna High Court in the case of Bihar State Warehousing Corp. Ltd. (88 Taxmann.com 455; 16.03.2016); Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand in CIT V/s Kicha Sugar Co. Ltd. (35 Taxmann.com 54; 20.05.2013); Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT V/s Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

Late Mr.Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj Rep by Legal Heir - Mr.Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Appeal is allowed

ITA 660/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singhand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…Patna High Court in the case of Bihar State Warehousing Corp. Ltd. (88 Taxmann.com 455; 16.03.2016); Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand in CIT V/s Kicha Sugar Co. Ltd. (35 Taxmann.com 54; 20.05.2013); Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in CIT V/s Vijay Shree Ltd. (43 Taxmann.com 396; 06.09.2011). Thus, pre-dominant view of majority of Hon’ble High Court is in assessee’s favor wherein it was held that the Employees’ Contribution paid by the assessee before due date of furnishing of return of income u/s 139(1) would be an allowable deduction considering the provisions of Sec.43B. However, view against the assessee has b…

Dalmia Laminators Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 102/KOL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 139Section 139(1)Section 14(2)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 102/Kol/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dalmia Laminators Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata (PAN: AABCD 1748 C) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 31.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement 14.09.2022 For the Appellant Shri N.S. Saini, AR For the Respondent Smt. Ranu Biswas, ACIT, DR ORDER Per Shri Sonjoy Sarma, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT’] dated 26.11.2021 pas…

Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd.

What is Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Calcutta in CIT v. Vijay Shree Ltd.

Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru / I.T.O., Circle - 7(2), Kolkata

Hemendra Nath Deka, Guwahati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

Hemendra Nath Deka, Guwahati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

First Choice Ready Mix, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-50(2), Kolkata

Pratap Kundu, Bankura Jogipara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bankura

Siddhi Vinayaka Graphics Pvt., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bengaluru/ACIT, Circle - 7(2), Kolkata

Nimbus Pipes Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle-4, Jaipur

M/S. Suresh Electricals, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

Bhoruka Fabcons Private Limited, Mysuru vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

Chase Security, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1), Bangalore

Rukmani Tea Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata

Cleantech Management Services Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(3), Kolkata

Topsel Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 2, Kolkata

Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata

Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata

Inspectorate Griffith India Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

M/S, Madras Hydraulic Hose Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai

Late Mr.Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj Rep by Legal Heir - Mr.Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Late Mr.Seshadri Naidu Dharmaraj Rep by Legal Heir - Mr.Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. CPC, Bangalore

Dalmia Laminators Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Kolkata