DCIT,CIRCLE-15(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S L.G.W. LIMITED, NORTH 24 PARGANAS

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Dcit, Circle-15(2), V/S. M/S L.G.W. Ltd., 10, Shantipally, Em Vill. Narayanpur, P.O. Bypass, Aayakar Rajarhat, Gopalpur, 24- Bhawan, Poorva, 6Th Parganas (North), West Floor, R.No.615, Bengal-700136 Kolkata-700 107 [Pan No.Aaacl 4670 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit- अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Dr Shri A.K. Tibrerwal, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2016, Passed In Case No.47/Cit(A)-5/Cir.14(1)/15-16, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S First Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Reversing Assessment Findings Disallowing The Taxpayer’S Commission Payments Made To Foreign Export Agents Amounting To ₹257,60,898/- For Non Deduction Of Tds U/S 40(A)(I) As Follows:- “1. Commission To Foreign Agents - Rs.2,57,60,898/- The Ao Has Added Sum Of Rs.2,57,60,898/- By Holding That The Said Amounts Were Paid To Foreign Agents Without Deduction Of Tds U/S.195. The Addition Has Been Made U/S

10, Shantipally, EM Vill. Narayanpur, P.O. Bypass, Aayakar Rajarhat, Gopalpur, 24- Bhawan, Poorva, 6th Parganas (North), West Floor, R.No.615, Bengal-700136 Kolkata-700 107 [PAN No.AAACL 4670 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT- अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant DR Shri A.K. Tibrerwal, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार

ARSH IRON & STEEL LTD.,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIR-3, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS 2. List of the parties to whom the commission was paid with PAN and their business expertise 3. The services rendered by the commission agents along with the details of sales against which the commission was paid. 4. Details of the nexus between the commission and the business of the assessee. ITA No.206-207/Kol/2014 A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11 Arsh

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SPML INFRA LIMITED , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1228/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

10. We note that Ld. AO re Ld. AO received some information from the JCIT, Range ceived some information from the JCIT, Range-8, Ahmedabad and without making proper verification and further enquiries, alleged Ahmedabad and without making proper verification and further enquiries, alleged Ahmedabad and without making proper verification and further enquiries, alleged that the expenditure of Rs.5.42 crores

M/S. SPML INFRA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1228/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

10. We note that Ld. AO re Ld. AO received some information from the JCIT, Range ceived some information from the JCIT, Range-8, Ahmedabad and without making proper verification and further enquiries, alleged Ahmedabad and without making proper verification and further enquiries, alleged Ahmedabad and without making proper verification and further enquiries, alleged that the expenditure of Rs.5.42 crores

AT & S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KARNATAKA vs. DCIT-RANGE-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmed

108,693 13,386 No Einfuhurung B. Licences for firewall software and hardware. Costs will ITA No.1160 & 2305/Kol/2013 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2004-05 DCIT Cir-11, Kol v. M/s AT & S India Pvt. Ltd. Page 10 be evenly spared among the total number of plants lin the AT&S group Project Firewall 1N11 4 3,589 449 No Cisco

D.C.I.T CIR - 11,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AT & S INDIA PVT LTD, KARNATAKA

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmed

108,693 13,386 No Einfuhurung B. Licences for firewall software and hardware. Costs will ITA No.1160 & 2305/Kol/2013 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2004-05 DCIT Cir-11, Kol v. M/s AT & S India Pvt. Ltd. Page 10 be evenly spared among the total number of plants lin the AT&S group Project Firewall 1N11 4 3,589 449 No Cisco

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

TDS on the payment made by GRSE (i.e. the payer) but did not include the full amount of receipt from GRSE. The treatment given by the assessee in its accounts as well as in computation of its total income was contrary to the provisions of Section 198 & 199 of the Act. In view of this legal position, the difference amount

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

TDS on the payment made by GRSE (i.e. the payer) but did not include the full amount of receipt from GRSE. The treatment given by the assessee in its accounts as well as in computation of its total income was contrary to the provisions of Section 198 & 199 of the Act. In view of this legal position, the difference amount

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. DREAM BAKE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

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

TDS Certificate is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure - 7. For ready reference. This clearly indicates that loan/advance received from Switz Foods is backed by commercial consideration and is not gratuitous in nature. 6.0 The appellant would like to draw attention that part of the loan granted by Switz Foods is adjusted against the dues which it owes

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]

10 (SC) (b) Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Baldeoram Beharilal reported in (1975) 99 ITR 108 (Cal) (c ) Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Travancore Tea Estates Co Ltd vs CIT reported in (1992) 197 ITR 528 (Ker) (d) Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Gillanders

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]

10 (SC) (b) Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Baldeoram Beharilal reported in (1975) 99 ITR 108 (Cal) (c ) Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Travancore Tea Estates Co Ltd vs CIT reported in (1992) 197 ITR 528 (Ker) (d) Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Gillanders

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA vs. EDMOND FINVEST PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

10 loan creditors, the AO has chosen to accept the genuineness of transactions and their identity and creditworthiness of 7 loan creditors who had advanced loans to the appellant. However, the AO disbelieved the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the remaining 3 loan creditors and accordingly made the addition

DCIT, CIRCLE -2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BATA INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05

TDS of Rs. 1,87,17,189 in respect of this transaction of royalty or fee payment. The appellant gets relief on this issue. 25. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue has preferred Gr.No.2 before the Tribunal. At the time of hearing it was brought to our notice that in the present

M/S. BATA INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05

TDS of Rs. 1,87,17,189 in respect of this transaction of royalty or fee payment. The appellant gets relief on this issue. 25. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue has preferred Gr.No.2 before the Tribunal. At the time of hearing it was brought to our notice that in the present

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MCNALLY BHARATI ENGINEERING CO.LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.100/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2006-07

TDS certificates issued by CESC. Hence, the claim of the assessee made before ld. CIT(A) is found correct and accordingly the same is allowed.” 58. Since the AO has himself accepted the claim of the assessee, we are of the view that there is no merit in ground no.3 raised by the revenue. As far as ground no.3 raised

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RG-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

10. Coming to assessee’s legal argument in view of Maxopp investments Ltd. (supra), it transpires that their lordships had decided proportionate interest disallowance issue in relation to exempt income rather than indirect expenditure in the nature of overheads therein. It has already come on record that the Assessing Officer has not accepted assessee’s books computing its suo moto

DCIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

10. Coming to assessee’s legal argument in view of Maxopp investments Ltd. (supra), it transpires that their lordships had decided proportionate interest disallowance issue in relation to exempt income rather than indirect expenditure in the nature of overheads therein. It has already come on record that the Assessing Officer has not accepted assessee’s books computing its suo moto

SUVAPRASANNA BHATTACHARYA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 55, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07 Suvaprasanna Bhatacharya V/S. Acit, Circle-55, Bh-167, Salt Lake, Sector- 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Ii, Kolkata-700 016 Kidwai Road, [Pan No.Aedpb 2611 R] Kolkata – 700 016 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

108/- which will be taxed at special rate of 10%. Assessed u/s.143(3) of the I.T.Act, 1961. Issue demand notice. Penalty proceeding u/s.271(1)( c) initiated. Tax calculation is given shown below. Tax 21,69,024 Add Surcharge 21,902 Education cess 47,719 Total 24,33,645 Less TDS (-) 1,29,449 Total 25,23,977 ITA No.1303/Kol/2010