DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. TIDE WATER OIL CO. (INDIA) LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Tide Water Oil Co. (India) Dy. Cit, Circle 4(1) Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Yule House,8, Chowringhee Square, 8Th Floor, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Sarani, Vs. Room No.23, Kolkata-700069 Kolkata-700001, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct1122C Assessee By : Shri Anup Sinha, Ar Revenue By : Shri Praveen Kishore, Cit Date Of Hearing: 13.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

depreciation of Rs.10 crores. 6.1.1 The AO CPC-TDS rejected the assessee’s application u/s.154 on the ground that the same

DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HARBANSLAL MALHOTRA & SONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The A.O. 04. That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That It Is A Fit Case For Imposition Of Penalty U/S 27L(L)(C) Of The Act. 05. That The Department Craves Leave To Add, Modify Or Alter Any Of The Above Ground(S) Of Appeal And/Or Adduce Additional Evidence At The Time Of Hearing Of The Case.

TDS certificates a sum of Rs.28,30,098/- and ii) in respect of non filing of any supporting evidence to substantiate the claim of depreciation

M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

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

TDS 4. Large other expenses claimed in the Profit & Loss A/c 5. Large any other deduction claimed in such BP creating a loss without any income in Profit & Loss a/c 6. Depreciation

SURAJ INTERNATIONAL,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

TDS and Insurance Policy Rs. 4,37,667/- iv) Disallowances of depreciation on motor car Rs. 1,57,949/- v) Addition

NORBEN TEA & EXPORTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra]

depreciation debited to the profit and loss account, interest on delayed payment of TDS, non-payment of professional tax, non-payment

WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION CO LTD,KOLKATA vs. C.I.T KOLKATA - I,KOKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as stated above

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) of the Act. 4. The CIT, further noticed a short fall of deduction of TDS

PATTON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Patton International Principal Commissioner Of Ltd., C/O Jain Vinod K & Income-Tax, Kolkata-1. Associates, 41A, A. J. C. Vs Bose Road, Diamond . Prestige Nirman, 6Th Floor, Suite No.613, Kolkata- 700017 (Pan: Aabcp7901M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS which is contrary to the observations made by the Ld. Pr. CIT. 5.2. On the third issue of double claim of depreciation

DEEPAK BAJAJ,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 40(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2009-10 Deepak Bajaj Ito, Ward-40(1), Kolkata 77, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Gd. Vs. Floor, Kalighat, Kolkata- 700026. Pan: Aeepb 5525 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Dilip Chatterjee, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.04.2023 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Cit(A)- 12, Kolkata Vide Order No. 40/Cit(A)-12/Kol/Ward-40(1)/2014-15 Dated 09.06.2016 Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(1)/147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

TDS was done. Another disallowance of Rs. 45,845/- was made by taking 5% of the expenses towards car hire charges, conveyance and depreciation

M/S REFORM CHAIN & TOOLS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble] I.T.A. No. 741/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Reform Chain & Tools (P) Ltd.......................................................................................Appellant 43, Motisil Street, Kolkata – 700 013. [Pan: Aadcr 8091 C] Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Kolkata ..................………………………………………..................................Respondent Appearances By: None Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Gautam Mondal, Acit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue: Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 23, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 06, 2022 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm:

TDS and thereby making the disallowance is bad in law. ii. For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding disallowance of the depreciation

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA vs. TCG URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

Depreciation on fixed assets installed at Mumbai Office Rs. 3,97,821/­ G. Repairs & Maintenance of building Rs. 3,73,126/­ H. Tenants Service charges Rs. 6,48,000/­ I. Preparation of site plan Rs. 10,000/­ J. Registration of Lease Deed Rs. 30,500/­ K. Interest on TDS

EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Depreciation 2. Low Income shown by Large Contractors 3. Large refund claim of Advance tax 4. Large deduction u/s 35, 35{2AA), 35 (2AB) 5. Higher Ratio of Refund to TDS

KEVENTER AGRO LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

depreciation claimed is hereby ordered to be deleted. 8. Ground No. 2: “That, the Ld. A.O. wrongly disallowed business expenditure of Rs.9,959/-incurred on payment of interest for delayed payment of TDS

KEVENTER AGRO LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

depreciation claimed is hereby ordered to be deleted. 8. Ground No. 2: “That, the Ld. A.O. wrongly disallowed business expenditure of Rs.9,959/-incurred on payment of interest for delayed payment of TDS

ACIT, CIT-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BNK E SOLUTION PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed and the C

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

TDS u/s 194C 194J Rs.5,45,692/- (ii) u/s 37(1) on account of inadmissible donation Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 5,66,522/- Total Income from Business Rs.3,63,56,869/- Less: Brought forward business loss set off Rs.43,91,870/- Less: Brought forward unabsorbed depreciation

DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MCNALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

depreciation and accordingly deleted the disallowance by the ld AO. We do not find any infirmity in the said order of the ld CIT(A) . Accordingly, Ground No. 4 in ITA No. 1575/Kol/2011 for Asst Year 2008-09 raised by the revenue is dismissed. 14. DISALLOWANCE OF TDS

MC NALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

depreciation and accordingly deleted the disallowance by the ld AO. We do not find any infirmity in the said order of the ld CIT(A) . Accordingly, Ground No. 4 in ITA No. 1575/Kol/2011 for Asst Year 2008-09 raised by the revenue is dismissed. 14. DISALLOWANCE OF TDS

DCIT,CC-VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SALTEE INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Depreciation” is not an expenditure but the same is statutory deduction. In view of above, we are of the considered opinion that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is not applicable in the instant case. Therefore, there is no question of deducting the TDS

M/S KHALSA BROTHERS,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee (in Ground No

TDS u/s 194C, in a transaction of purchase and sale of machine spares (duly supported by VAT tax invoice) and the addition illegally sustained may please be deleted. 6.For the that ld. CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.45,65,154/- on A/c of depreciation

DR. PARTHA BISWAS,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 55, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2011-12 Dr. Partha Biswas Jcit, Range-55, बनाम / House No.4 Cluster-Vii, Kolkata-700 016 V/S. Purbachal, Salt Lake City, Kolkta-97 [Pan No.Agupb 7947 B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 23-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 31-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata’S Order Dated 07.03.2017, Passed In Case No.135/Cit(A)-6/Kol/14-15 Upholding Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Addition His Salary Payment Made To Dr. Shule Kumar Of ₹62,000/- As Well As Depreciation Of Car & Driver Salary @ 20% Coming To ₹28,204; Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. 2. We Come To Former Issue Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Disallowance Of ₹62,000/-. The Assessee Had Admittedly Paid The Impugned Sum In The Months Of June To November, 2010 @ ₹10,000/- Per Month For Four Months & ₹ 11,000/- Each For Two Months. He Did Not Deduct Tds Thereupon By Treating The Same To Be In The Nature Of Salary. Both The Lower Authorities Have Rejected His Claim In Absence Of Employee-Employer Relationship To Treat The Sum In Question As Fee In Lies Of Availing Professional Services. They Conclude That Payee Doctor Had In Fact Assisted The Assessee Rather Than Having

TDS deduction u/s. 192 of the Act. We therefore accept assessee’s former substantive ground challenging of section 40(a)(ia) disallowance of ₹62,000/-. He succeeds in the instant former substantive ground. 3. Next comes to assessee’s latter substantive ground challenging both the lower authorities action disallowing his car depreciation