M/S. BATA INDIA LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DDIT, CPC, , BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS was granted by the CPC, which was sent by mail to the assessee on 25/05/2023; the validity of the intimation served by the DDIT, CPC, Bengaluru on 25.05.2023 and bearing the date 29.12.2021 is claimed to be barred by limitation and liable to be quashed. The other grounds relating to section 115P of the Act was also raised

DEBOTTOR TRUST ESTATE OF RAMMOHAN MULLICK,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 43(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

2. The AO also observed that the assessee has claimed personal expenses against the income of other sources which are not allowable under section 57 of the Act. However it was submitted that the trust is not registered under section 12A of the Act and consequently there is no question for claiming the exemption under section

MARTIN BURN LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 4(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

2 of 5 under section 143(3) of the Act vide an order dated 29.12.2008, an addition of Rs.37,98,048/-, inter alia, was made by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee under section 40(a)(ia) towards payment of rent made by the assessee to Calcutta Port Trust without deduction of tax at source

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

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs.10,128,788/- made by the Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [‘AO'], being reimbursement of rework costs by the Appellant to AT&S Austria by applying the provisions of section

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

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs.10,128,788/- made by the Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [‘AO'], being reimbursement of rework costs by the Appellant to AT&S Austria by applying the provisions of section

MSTC LTD,KOLKATA vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, CIR-1(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2021-22

TDS not made (as per audit report) has also been disallowed by the assessee. In view of the above, no adverse inference is drawn and assessment is completed on returned income.” 5. In the computation of income, the income as per the return of income filed was taken as Rs. ‘Nil’ to which the income as computed

SHRI DILIP KUMAR NATHANY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-43(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2012-13

12A,Madn Chaterjee Lane, Ward-43(3), Kolkata V/s. Kolkata [PAN No.ABGPN 1342 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shi K.M. Roy, AR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Baijuath Singh, Addl. CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 02-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 23-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement

LIFE SAVING SOCIETY OF INDIA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O. (EXEMPTION), WARD - 1(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2365/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 & I.T.A. No. 2366/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016

TDS of Rs.22,996/- was served before grant of registration under section 12A for A.Y. 2015-16. Petition under section 154 for rectification of the said demand of Rs.9,77,120/- was filed on 23.01.2019 but ld. Assessing Officer rejected the petition. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee-Trust preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 2

LIFE SAVINGS SOCIETY OF INDIA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., (EXEMPTION), WARD - 1(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2365/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 & I.T.A. No. 2366/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016

TDS of Rs.22,996/- was served before grant of registration under section 12A for A.Y. 2015-16. Petition under section 154 for rectification of the said demand of Rs.9,77,120/- was filed on 23.01.2019 but ld. Assessing Officer rejected the petition. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee-Trust preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 2

ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CENTRAL TOOL ROOM & TRAINING CENTRE, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T. A No. 1684/Kol/2017 A.Y 2014-15 I.T.O (Exemption), Vs. Central Tool Room & Ward-1(1), Kol. Training Centre, Kolkata Pan: Aaaac2480P (Appellant) (Respondent)

12A registration certificate, statement of expenditure incurred against Govt. grants from F.Ys 2013-14 to 2014-15 with copies of ledger accounts, correspondence with regard to grant’s utilization and directions of utilization certificate issued by 2 ITO, E, W 1(1) Kol Vs. Central Tool Room & Training Centre, Kolkata Govt. of India, utilization of certificates and various judicial precedents

SUPER IRON FOUNDRY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 36, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav(Kz)& Shri Rajesh Kumar]

TDS certificate , bank statement and assessment order for AY 2014-15 of the lender. The ld CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assesse to the tune of Rs. 47,00,000/- on account of uncleared cheques by the lender so the addition sustained by the ld CIT(A) was to the tune

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PARIJAT VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable in this case. Accordingly, the AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs.1,42,033/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS from transportation charge. This ground of appeal is allowed.” The Revenue, being aggrieved, is in appeal before us. 21. Before us both parties relied on the order

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PARIJAT VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable in this case. Accordingly, the AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs.1,42,033/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS from transportation charge. This ground of appeal is allowed.” The Revenue, being aggrieved, is in appeal before us. 21. Before us both parties relied on the order

ACIT, CIR-1, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

section 11 of the Act are not applicable to the assessee as it is not registered u/s 12A of the Act. 7. At the outset, we find that the assessment was completed for the year under consideration on 29.12.2011 on the presumption that the assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, on perusal

ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

section 11 of the Act are not applicable to the assessee as it is not registered u/s 12A of the Act. 7. At the outset, we find that the assessment was completed for the year under consideration on 29.12.2011 on the presumption that the assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, on perusal

ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

section 11 of the Act are not applicable to the assessee as it is not registered u/s 12A of the Act. 7. At the outset, we find that the assessment was completed for the year under consideration on 29.12.2011 on the presumption that the assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, on perusal

DCIT(E),CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

section 11 of the Act are not applicable to the assessee as it is not registered u/s 12A of the Act. 7. At the outset, we find that the assessment was completed for the year under consideration on 29.12.2011 on the presumption that the assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, on perusal

ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,DURGAPUR vs. ITO(TDS), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

section 11 of the Act are not applicable to the assessee as it is not registered u/s 12A of the Act. 7. At the outset, we find that the assessment was completed for the year under consideration on 29.12.2011 on the presumption that the assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, on perusal