DCIT,CIR-43,KOL, KOLKATA vs. S.K.AGARWALA & CO, KOLKATA

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

131 of the Act were replied, though no personal attendance was made before the ld. Assessing Officer by the loan creditors but mere non-attendance of the third party lenders before the ld. Assessing Officer would not render the transactions as non-genuine. In defence of his arguments ,the Ld. Counsel relied on the following decisions:- (i) CIT –vs.- Dataware

DCIT,CIR-43,KOL, KOLKATA vs. S.K.AGARWALA & CO, KOLKATA

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

131 of the Act were replied, though no personal attendance was made before the ld. Assessing Officer by the loan creditors but mere non-attendance of the third party lenders before the ld. Assessing Officer would not render the transactions as non-genuine. In defence of his arguments ,the Ld. Counsel relied on the following decisions:- (i) CIT –vs.- Dataware

INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, POORVA vs. AMODINI VYAPAR PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Amodini Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Kalpanalaya, Avirampur, Po- 7Th Floor, Nadt Building, Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, 110 Shantipally, Budge Budge, Vs. Kolkata-700107 Kolkata-700137, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacca2332G Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024

section 131 to the contractors have remained uncomplied with, by such contractors. In this regard, it is the case of the assessee that the payments to job work providers have been subjected to TDS

ACIT, CIR-29, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ANS LEATHER COMPANY, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1071/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit, Circle-29, Kolkata Vs. Ans Leather Company

131 of the Act, with creditors/suppliers of Hide& Skins. There is no effort to find out the present addresses of suppliers. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee could not do anything further except requesting the Revenue to issue summons to creditors/ suppliers. We note that the assessee has discharged hisonus and burden in proving

EXIMCORP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

131 (Andhra Pradesh), wherein it has been said that if interest is debited to the account of an Indian company by a bank to recoup the interest charged to it by the discounting bank, then the provisions of Section 195 of the Act will not apply. It has been further averred that the appellant is not the person responsible

EXIMCORP INDIA (P) LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

131 (Andhra Pradesh), wherein it has been said that if interest is debited to the account of an Indian company by a bank to recoup the interest charged to it by the discounting bank, then the provisions of Section 195 of the Act will not apply. It has been further averred that the appellant is not the person responsible

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S SHIV SHAKTI STEEL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Shiv Shakti Steel Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Vs. 4, B. B. D. Bag (East), Kolkata Kolkata-700001. (Pan: Aagcs9768L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.03.2015. The interest expenditure claimed by the assessee is interest income of the lender company which has been duly accepted in its assessment. If the claim of interest expenditure by the assessee is disallowed, it will lead to taxing the same amount twice. Further, Ld. Counsel submitted that identity

ITO, WARD - 12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HARSHWARDHAN GEMS P. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue and that of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

section 292C of the Act treated the diaries found as belonging to assessee and recomputed the unaccounted purchases after taking remand report from the AO at Rs.6,76,562/- and also treated the same as sales and thereby worked out profit rate @ 13.39% and estimated the profit at Rs.90,591/- by observing in para 4.10, 4.11, 4.12 and para

HARSHWARDHAN GEMS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue and that of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

section 292C of the Act treated the diaries found as belonging to assessee and recomputed the unaccounted purchases after taking remand report from the AO at Rs.6,76,562/- and also treated the same as sales and thereby worked out profit rate @ 13.39% and estimated the profit at Rs.90,591/- by observing in para 4.10, 4.11, 4.12 and para

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

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

ALOK ARYA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 37(4), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "143(1)", "143(2)", "142(1)", "131", "133(6)" ], "issues": "Whether the disallowance of commission expenses

IRIS CLOTHINGS LTD,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar

TDS was duly deducted and deposited in the Government Treasury. The ld. A.R. stated that notices were issued under section 133(6) of the Act and duly served to six parties out of twelve parties and they have duly complied with the said notices by furnishing all the information/details as called for by the ld. Assessing Officer

M/S. FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

TDS on reimbursement is found to be not acceptable, the deduction of tax at source, if any, was required to be done as per the provisions of section 194B applicable to payment of income by way of winning from any lottery, etc. and not under section 194G as held by the ld. CIT. He invited our attention to the provisions

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/

131 OF 20101 JULY 9,2013 Section 37, read with section 35D, of the Income­tax Act, 1961 ­ Business expenditure ­ Allowability of [Set up of business/Commencement of business] ­ Whether running expenses from date of setting up of business till date of commencement of business/commercial operation cannot be said to be capital in nature, said expenses are to be allowed as revenue

DCIT, CC-2(3), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. MAXCAB INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Maxcab Industries Pvt. Ltd. 4Th Floor, 110 Shantipally, 67/C, Balaram Dey Street, E.M. Bypass, Vs. West Bengal-700006 West Bengal-700107 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aancm1997Q Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Ms. Nandini Surekh, Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Ars Revenue By : Praveen Kishore, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2025

section 131 of the Act on 02.03.2023from Navin Kumar Saffar. At the assessment hearing stage, Show Cause notice was issued to the appellant company with respect to the aforesaid statement of Navin Kumar Saffar. There is allegation that the said loan represent accommodation entry transaction. It was submitted by the appellant company that the said data file contains

SMT NIRMALI BHADRA GHOSH,DARJEELING vs. ACIT, CIR-3, SILIGURI, DARJEELING

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

131 or / and under section 133(6) to the said Unipay 2U Marketing Pvt. Ltd. and / or to the Tax Deductor, issued those said Form No.16As to arrange cross examination by me as demanded vide submission dated 08-03-2013 (Page No. 9 to 10 of Paper Book). iii) The Ld. A.C.l.T. never tried to collect and verify the actual