PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS) , KOLKATA vs. NIRMAL KUMAR KEJRIWAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

TDS) KOLKATA -Versus- NIRMAL KUMAR KEJRIWAL Appearance: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharyya, Adv. ...for the appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ananda Sen, Adv. ...for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM -And- The Hon’ble JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK Date : 22nd July, 2022. The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EIH LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Tribunal erred in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs.9,27,20,974/- under Section 40(a)(i) on account of advertisement publicity and sales promotion to non resident by ignoring the fact that such expenses are subject to tax in India under Section 9(1

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14 KOLKATA vs. RAMESH CHAND GUPTA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Tribunal erred in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs.9,27,20,974/- under Section 40(a)(i) on account of advertisement publicity and sales promotion to non resident by ignoring the fact that such expenses are subject to tax in India under Section 9(1

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC LTD

Bench: The Learned Tribunal – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Which Have Been Disposed Of By A Common Order, Impugned In This Appeal. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :

TDS for information technology expense, information technology expense, patent registration charges, advances written off, excise duty debited to profit and loss account, disallowance under Section 40(a) for payment made for export commission, disallowance under Section 40(a) for payment made to foreign parties, bogus purchases, liquidated damages, income tax interest expense, commission to non-executive directors, disallowance under Section

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. M/S SREELEATHERS

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata has answered in favour of the assessee regarding addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 unsecured loan and interest there off? (iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and on question of law the Learned

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-14, KOLKATA vs. PKS HOLDINGS

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the question nos

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

iii) coordination charges to the tune of Rs.51,00,000/- In order to answer the substantial question of law, we proceed to deal with the three issues in seriatim. The assessee filed its return of income on 15th November, 2007 disclosing a total income of Rs.10,58,28,346/-. The case was processed under Section 143(1

JET AGE SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-III

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

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

III Appearance:- Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Bhaumik, Adv. Mrs. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Das, Adv. .….For the Appellant. Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …..For the Respondent. ITA NO. 79 OF 2010 Page 2 of 12 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.) 1. This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A