REI Agro Ltd. v. DCIT

Tcg Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-11(2), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (Kz) & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Jm ]

…1 I.T.A. No.1553&1554/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA [ Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (KZ) and Smt. Madhumita Roy, JM ] I.T.A. No.1553&1554/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 TCG Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle-11(2), Kolkata PAN: AABCC0401D Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 24/08/2021 Date of Pronouncement 27/08/2021 For the Appellant Shri A. K. Tibrewal, AR For the Respondent Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR ORDER Per Smt. Madhumita Roy, JM Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the sepa…

Tcg Lifesciences Limited., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-11(2), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (Kz) & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Jm ]

…1 I.T.A. No.1553&1554/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA [ Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (KZ) and Smt. Madhumita Roy, JM ] I.T.A. No.1553&1554/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 TCG Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle-11(2), Kolkata PAN: AABCC0401D Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 24/08/2021 Date of Pronouncement 27/08/2021 For the Appellant Shri A. K. Tibrewal, AR For the Respondent Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR ORDER Per Smt. Madhumita Roy, JM Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the sepa…

D.C.I.T., Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Universal Cables Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

…r directions to take into account only the exempt income yielding investments; respectively. The CIT(A) has admittedly gone by the tribunal’s findings in earlier assessment year(s) in tune with yet another coordinate bench’s decision in REI Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol) as upheld in hon’ble jurisdictional high court in G. A. No. 3581 of 2013 to this effect. Learned departmental representative fails to rebut this clinching fact that the CIT(A) has adopted judicial consistency wherein the twin clinching factual issues have been restored back to Assessing Officer for factual verification qua the corresponding…

DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tm International Logistics Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

…ise to the exempt income, in other words the assessee's contention is that only the investment made on dividend bearing shares can only attract Rule 8D(ii) and for the said proposition has relied on the order of the co-ordinate bench in REI Agro Ltd. Vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Cal). We find force in the contention of the Ld. AR and we are inclined to accept the same and, therefore, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the AO to compute Rule 8D(ii) only in respect of the investment made by assessee in shares which resulted in dividend in the instant assessment year. With the…

Naga Dhunseri Group Ltd., Kolkata vs. P.C.I.T.-2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

…Ld. PCIT, since disallowance as per Rule 8D(1)(iii) has been suo-motto done by the assessee in accordance to law i.e. 0.5% of the investment which yielded exempt income [ Rs. 14,18,798/- u/s 14A ]by relying on the decision of ITAT Kolkata in REI Agro Ltd. in 144 ITD 141 (Kol-Trib) which was upheld by the Hon’ble jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the order dated 09.04.2014 in ITA No. 220 of 2013. Therefore according to Ld. A.R on merits also no disallowance was warranted. Therefore, looking from any angle according to Ld. AR, the AO by accepting the computation & suo-moto disallowance in respect of exempt inc…

DCIT, CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Rungta Mines Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A No.2199/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Acit, Cc-1(3), Kolkata Vs. M/S Rungta Mines Pvt. Ltd. 8A, Express Tower, 42A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr6463N (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…de disallowance of Rs. 63,31,460/- and added the same to the total income of assessee. The assessee challenged the same before the CIT-A. The CIT-A by placing reliance on an order of Kolkata Bench (ITAT, Kolkata) in the case of REI Agro Ltd reported in (2013) 144 ITD 141 (Kolkata-Trib)/ITA No. 1331/Kol/2011 directed the AO to verify the details of investment and to compute the expenditure accordingly in terms of investment, which yielded exempt income. 18. Before us the ld.AR placed on record the order of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of REI Agro Ltd and argued that the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta…

J.C.I.T., (OSD), Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Universal Cables Limited, Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.1461/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Jcit(Osd), Circle-6(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Universal Cables Limited 9/1, R. N. Mukherjee Road, Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacu3547P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Jayanta Khangra, Jcit Respondent By : None सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 08/09/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/09/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Order Dated 01.02.2019 Passed In Case No.10403/Cit(A)-2/2017-18 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. It Is Accordingly Proceeded Ex Parte. 2. It Emerges At The Outset That This Revenue’S Appeal Suffers From 46 Days’ Delay In Filing. It Is Pleaded In The Condonation Petition/Affidavit Dated 13.06.19 That The Relevant File/Papers Were Not Available With The Concerned Authorities. All These Solemn Averments Have Gone Unrebutted From The Assessee Side. Hon’Ble Apex Court In Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katji & Ors [1987] 167 Itr 0471 (Sc) Held Long Back That The Cause Of Substantial Justice Prevails Over All Technical Aspects. We Thus Treat This 46 Days’ Delay In Filing As Neither Intentional Nor Deliberate But On Account Of Communication Gap Between Different Authorities At Departmental Level. Thus Appeal Is Taken Up For Adjudication On Merits Therefore.

…r directions to take into account only the exempt income yielding investments; respectively. The CIT(A) has admittedly gone by the tribunal’s findings in earlier assessment year(s) in tune with yet another coordinate bench’s decision in REI Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol) as upheld in hon’ble jurisdictional high court in G. A. No. 3581 of 2013 to this effect. Learned departmental representative fails to rebut this clinching fact that the CIT(A) has adopted judicial consistency wherein the twin clinching factual issues have been restored back to Assessing Officer for factual verification qua the corresponding…

ACIT, Circle - 5(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-

…at the said disallowance was worked out by the Assessing Officer by applying the rate of 0.5% to the entire cost of investment. In this regard, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of REI Agro Limited –vs.- DCIT reported in 144 ITD 141, wherein it was held that the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) is required to be computed and restricted only to the investment that actually yielded the exempt dividend income to the assessee during the relevant year. He also noted that his predecessor in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2012-13 vide its appellate…

DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata vs. The Peerless Gen. Fin. & Inv. Co. Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15

…nt qua the third head of administrative expenditure as well since the CIT(A) has only directed the Assessing Officer to compute the same after considering the exempt income yielding investment only as per this tribunal’s order in RIE Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT (2013) 144 ITD 141 (Kol) as upheld in jurisdictional high court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. ITA No.1486/Kol/2019 Assessment Year 2014-15 DCIT Cir-3(1)(3), Kol. Vs. M/s The Peerless General Finance & Investment & Co.. Ltd. Page 9 REI Agro Ltd. ITAT No. 161 of 2013 dated 23.12.2013. We thus reject the Revenue’s instant third substantive ground as well. The Rev…

Kesoram Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-5(1), Kolkata

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.1196&370/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13&2013-14) Kesoram Industries Limited Vs. Dcit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata 5/1, Clive Row, 4Th Floor, Room No.125, Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabck2417P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ca Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: These Assessee’S Two Appeals For Assessment Year 2012-13 & 2013-14 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) – 7, Kolkata & Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 22, Kolkata’ Separate Orders Dated 29.03.2019 & 31.12.2018 Passed In Case No.1007/Cit(A)-7/Circle-5(1)/Kol/15-16 & No.53/Cit(A)-22/13- 14/18-19/Kol Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) And144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’), Respectively. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused. 2. It Transpires At The Outset During The Course Of Hearing That The Assessee’S Sole Identical Grievance In Both These Appeals Challenges Correctness Of The Lower Authorities’ Action Invoking Section 14A R.W.R 8D(2)(Iii) Administrative Expenditure Disallowance Of Rs.33,04,500/- & Rs.33,18,000/- Relating To Its Exempt Income Of Rs.6,09,11,055/- & Rs.5,61,76,040/- Assessment Year Wise; Respectively. Suffice To Say, The Assessing Officer Went By 0.5% Of The Average Value Of Investments In The Corresponding Assessments Framed On 20.03.2015 &

…ourse of hearing that the instant sole issue is actually against the assessee and in Revenue’s favour as per tribunal’s orders in assessment year 2008-09 to 2009-10 involving ITA No.1037/Kol/2012 and ITA No.773/Kol/2013 following REI Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT (2013) 144 ITD 141 (Kol-Trib) as upheld by hon’ble jurisdictional high court in GA No.3581 of 2018 holding that only exempt income yielding investments have to be taken into consideration for purpose of computing administrative expenditure disallowance. No rebuttal to this clinching legal position has come from the assessee’s side. We thus confirm the CIT(A)’s acti…

Kesoram Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.1196&370/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13&2013-14) Kesoram Industries Limited Vs. Dcit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata 5/1, Clive Row, 4Th Floor, Room No.125, Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabck2417P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ca Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: These Assessee’S Two Appeals For Assessment Year 2012-13 & 2013-14 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) – 7, Kolkata & Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 22, Kolkata’ Separate Orders Dated 29.03.2019 & 31.12.2018 Passed In Case No.1007/Cit(A)-7/Circle-5(1)/Kol/15-16 & No.53/Cit(A)-22/13- 14/18-19/Kol Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) And144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’), Respectively. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused. 2. It Transpires At The Outset During The Course Of Hearing That The Assessee’S Sole Identical Grievance In Both These Appeals Challenges Correctness Of The Lower Authorities’ Action Invoking Section 14A R.W.R 8D(2)(Iii) Administrative Expenditure Disallowance Of Rs.33,04,500/- & Rs.33,18,000/- Relating To Its Exempt Income Of Rs.6,09,11,055/- & Rs.5,61,76,040/- Assessment Year Wise; Respectively. Suffice To Say, The Assessing Officer Went By 0.5% Of The Average Value Of Investments In The Corresponding Assessments Framed On 20.03.2015 &

…ourse of hearing that the instant sole issue is actually against the assessee and in Revenue’s favour as per tribunal’s orders in assessment year 2008-09 to 2009-10 involving ITA No.1037/Kol/2012 and ITA No.773/Kol/2013 following REI Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT (2013) 144 ITD 141 (Kol-Trib) as upheld by hon’ble jurisdictional high court in GA No.3581 of 2018 holding that only exempt income yielding investments have to be taken into consideration for purpose of computing administrative expenditure disallowance. No rebuttal to this clinching legal position has come from the assessee’s side. We thus confirm the CIT(A)’s acti…

JCIT, (OSD), Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Isg Traders Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2012-13

…assessing officer and the same is hereby upheld. In view of above, this part ground of appeal is dismissed. As regards to disallowance of the expenses under rule 8D (ii) and rule 8D (iii), the Hon'ble jurisdictional ITAT in the case of REI Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT (144 ITD 141) has held that only the investments which actually yield exempt income has to be considered for the purposes of application of Rule 8D(2)(iii). The ITAT held that the investments which did not yield any tax-free income in the relevant year were not required to be considered for the purposes of application of Rule 8D. Keeping in view, of above and…

DCIT, CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Emc Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeal of revenue is dismissed

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

…eferred to as the “Rules”) of Rs.51.59 lacs. Regarding this ground, it has been brought to our notice that the assessee has not earned any exempt income, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) taking note of this fact has relied on the Tribunal’s decision in REI Agro Ltd. 144 ITD 141 has given relief to the assessee which order has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in GA No. 3022 of 2013. We note that the Hon’ble Delhi High court in Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 wherein it has been held that where no exempt income was earned by the assessee, no disallowance could be made under section 14A of the Ac…

Ratnabali Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd., [Earlier Known As Ratnabali Capital Markets Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl.CIT, Range - 12, Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.356/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

…s to whether all shares held in ‘stock-in-trade’ should be considered for disallowance under section 14A or only those shares which yielded the dividend income? On this issue we note that Coordinate Bench of ITAT Kolkata in the case of REI Agro Ltd. Vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol-Trib) has held that it is only the Ratnabali Capital Markets Ltd. Assessment Year:2011-12 investments which yields dividend during the previous year that has to be considered while adopting the average value of investments for the purpose of Rule 8D(2)(ii) & (iii) of the Rules. The aforesaid view of the Tribunal has since been affirmed as co…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “"स” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Dr. A.L.Saini, Accountant Member ITA No.217 to 219/Kol/2018 & C.O No.94-96/Kol/2018 (a/o ITA No.217-219/Kol/2018) Assessment Years :2011-12 to 2013-14 DCIT, Central Cricle-2(1), M/s Paharpur Cooling 3rd Floor, Aayakar Towers Ltd., 81N. Bhawan, Poorva E.M. Bye Diamaond Harbour Pass, 110, Shanti Pally, Road, Kolkata-700 027 Kolkata-107 बनाम V/s. M/s Paharpur Cooling DCIT, Central Circle- 2(1), 3rd Floor, Aayakar Towers Ltd., 8/1/B, Diamond Harbour Road, Bhawan, Poor…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “"स” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Dr. A.L.Saini, Accountant Member ITA No.217 to 219/Kol/2018 & C.O No.94-96/Kol/2018 (a/o ITA No.217-219/Kol/2018) Assessment Years :2011-12 to 2013-14 DCIT, Central Cricle-2(1), M/s Paharpur Cooling 3rd Floor, Aayakar Towers Ltd., 81N. Bhawan, Poorva E.M. Bye Diamaond Harbour Pass, 110, Shanti Pally, Road, Kolkata-700 027 Kolkata-107 बनाम V/s. M/s Paharpur Cooling DCIT, Central Circle- 2(1), 3rd Floor, Aayakar Towers Ltd., 8/1/B, Diamond Harbour Road, Bhawan, Poor…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “"स” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Dr. A.L.Saini, Accountant Member ITA No.217 to 219/Kol/2018 & C.O No.94-96/Kol/2018 (a/o ITA No.217-219/Kol/2018) Assessment Years :2011-12 to 2013-14 DCIT, Central Cricle-2(1), M/s Paharpur Cooling 3rd Floor, Aayakar Towers Ltd., 81N. Bhawan, Poorva E.M. Bye Diamaond Harbour Pass, 110, Shanti Pally, Road, Kolkata-700 027 Kolkata-107 बनाम V/s. M/s Paharpur Cooling DCIT, Central Circle- 2(1), 3rd Floor, Aayakar Towers Ltd., 8/1/B, Diamond Harbour Road, Bhawan, Poor…

Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-12(1), Kolkata

In the result, statistical purposes the appeal of the assessee is treated to be allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.871/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2015-16)

…that DCIT has computed the expenses in a mechanical manner by applying the provisions of Rule 8D which was at an excessive figure. 5. Without prejudice to the ground no. 3 & 4 above, the learned CIT(A) though followed the decisions of REI Agro Ltd. Vs. DCIT (144 ITD 141) but erred in directing the DCIT to consider the monthly average value of certain specific investments in mutual funds instead of yearly average as prescribed in rule 8D(2)(iii). That the appellant crave leave to add, alter, amend and / or withdraw all or any of the ground at or before the hearing of the appeal. 3. Ground nos. 1 and 2 raised by…