ANIRUDH BHUWALKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A Nos.513&514/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Anirudh Bhuwalka.......................................................................……Appellant A.C. Bbhuteria & Co., 2 India Exchange Place, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-1 [Pan: Aegpb7445E] Vs. Dcit, Cpc…………….….….....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 14, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 09, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 22.09.2021 & 06.10.2021 Respectively Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.514/Kol/2021 For Assessment Year 2019-20 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita 514/Kol/2021 – The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

section 140(c) of the Income Tax Act. Further, even if an action is brought against the company for non-deduction of TDS

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

section 4(2) of the Act which provides that a person will have the obligation to withhold tax (TDS) under the Act in respect of income chargeable to tax u/s. 4(1) of the Act. The following case law were also submitted:- i) Lufthansa Cargo India Private Ltd 140

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

section 4(2) of the Act which provides that a person will have the obligation to withhold tax (TDS) under the Act in respect of income chargeable to tax u/s. 4(1) of the Act. The following case law were also submitted:- i) Lufthansa Cargo India Private Ltd 140

M/S VODAFONE EAST LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T RANGE - 7,KOL., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

TDS on amount paid to deductee and, in turn, deductee also hasn't offered to tax income embedded in such amount. The penalty for tax withholding lapse per se is separately provided under section 271C. and, therefore, section 40(a)(ia) isn't attracted to the same. Hence, an assessee could not be penalized under section 40(a)(ia) when

MAITHAN CERAMIC LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA

Section 140 of the said Act and delivered at my office on or before (b) ** produce or cause to be produced before me at my office at 3rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, Kolkata - 700107 on 16.05.2013 at 01:15 P.M. the accounts and / or documents specified overleaf. "AS PER ANNEXURE-A ENCLOSED" (c) **furnish in writing

ACIT, CIRCLE-43, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHREE HANUMAN IRON WORKS, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

TDS (Rs.3039/-), Advance Tax (Rs.100000) and allowing interest under section 244A (Rs. l4425/-), an amount of Rs. 117464/- was arrived at as 'refundable'. The refund amount was adjusted with refund made u/s 143(3) of Rs.3390 to result in a net refundable of Rs.114074/-. In response to notice u/s 142(1), the assessee submitted 'Details of purchases for the year

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CHAMPION COMMERCIAL CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Dcit, Circle-10(1), V/S. M/S Champion P-7, Chowringhee Commercial Co. Ltd., Square, 3Rd Floor, P-15, Cit Road, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-73 [Pan No.Aabcc 2373 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 26-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 04.04.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 10.02.2016 For Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “I. That On The Facts Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,50,938/- On A Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 37(1) Overrule The Judicial Pronouncement Of Cit Vs. Calcutta Agency Limited (1951) (191) Itr (Sc) Ii. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.13,91,404/- On A Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 37 Of The It Act, 1961. Iii. That On The Facts Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.20,25,329/- On Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The

140 and drew our attention on pages 56 of the paper book, where the month-wise of details of such expenses were placed. He reiterated the same submissions that were made before Ld. CIT(A). He supported the order of Ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available

M/S. BANDHAN BANK LTD. (ERSTWHILE GHOSH FINANCE LTD),KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-5(1), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2016-17

140/- after making certain disallowance and claim of deduction under various sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Along with the Tax Audit Report, GRUH had submitted audited accounts. In notes on account attached to the Balance Sheet, it has been stated that GRUH has issued / allotted equity shares to its employees and 4 M/s Bandhan Bank Limited

REKHA RANI GUPTA,BURDWAN (EAST) vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

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

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1059/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Rekha Rani Gupta, Vs Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan Hossainpur, Purba Bardhaman Pin-713125 Pan No. : Bxvpg 1588 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Smt. Madhumita Das, Sr.Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 29.02.2024 For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ld.Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Smt. Madhumita Das, Ld. Sr.Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was The Submission By The Ld. Ar That That The Assessee Had On The Basis Of The Form 26As Filed His Return Of Income. It Was The Submission That In The Form 26As It Was Shown That The Assessee Had Done Certain Contract Work For West Bengal State Electricity Board Burdwan Division. It Was The Submission That, In Fact, The Assessee Had Not Done Any Work. It Was The Submission That The West Bengal State Electricity Board Burdwan Division Had Also Clarified Before The Ao In Response To Notice U/S.133(6) Of The Act That The Assessee Has Not Done Any Work For Them. However, The Ao Added The Total Contract Amount As Shown In The Form 26As As Income

Section 140 of the Act, the income cannot be recomputed unless revised return is filed. 5. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the West Bengal State Electricity Board Burdwan Division has committed an error in the deduction and the credit of the TDS

M/S. SHANTI VYAPAR PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 9(1),, KOLKATA

section-140 of\nthe-said-Act-and-delivered-at-my-office-on-or-before\n(b)** produce or cause to be produced before me at my office at P-7, Chowringhee Square,\nKolkata - 69 on 20th June 2016 at 03.00 A.M./P.M the accounts and / or documents specified\noverleaf.\n(c) furnish-In-writing-and-verified-in-the-prescribed-manner

AXIX OVERSEAS LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

Section 194A of the Act. However, AO disregarded the contention of the assessee and made the disallowance of the interest expense claimed by the assessee for ₹1,71,36,916/- on account of following reasons. a) Diversion of interest bearing fund to non-commercial activity i.e., providing interest free loan / advance to its group concern; b) The interest expense

I.T.O WD - 6(2),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S AXIX OVERSEAS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

Section 194A of the Act. However, AO disregarded the contention of the assessee and made the disallowance of the interest expense claimed by the assessee for ₹1,71,36,916/- on account of following reasons. a) Diversion of interest bearing fund to non-commercial activity i.e., providing interest free loan / advance to its group concern; b) The interest expense

ACIT, CC-3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SNOWTEX INVESTMENT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) Asstt. Year : 2012-13 A.C.I.T, Cc-3(2), Kolkata Vs M/S. Snowtex Investment Ltd. Pan: Aaecs 0334C (Assessee/Department) (Respondent/Assessee)

140 (SC) relied on." We note that section 10(2)(iii) of the old Income Tax Act, 1922 is similar to section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In view of the above we confirm the order of ld CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.3,59,52,944/-. 27. Ground No. 9 raised

M/S BARASAT EYE HOSPITAL & M. R. C.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-55(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

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

140/- and the same was duly processed u/s 143(1) on 12-09- 2007.The case was reopened against which notices u/s 148 and 142(1) of the Act were issued, in response, the ARs representing the assessee appeared before the AO. 5. Ground no-1 relates to the addition of Rs 9,99,994/- as undisclosed income. Before

L & T FINANCE LIMITED (SUCCESSOR OF L & T INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW MERGED),KOLKATA vs. CIT(A),NFAC,ITD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

140/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and an assessment order was passed on 31.03.2016. The ld. Assessing Officer has made two additions to the income of the assessee. The assessee has earned dividend income of Rs.16,28,88,980/-. The ld. Assessing Officer was of the view that expenditure attributable to earning of exempt income

DCIT, KOLKATA vs. L & T FINANCE LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

140/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and an assessment order was passed on 31.03.2016. The ld. Assessing Officer has made two additions to the income of the assessee. The assessee has earned dividend income of Rs.16,28,88,980/-. The ld. Assessing Officer was of the view that expenditure attributable to earning of exempt income

TATA STEEL PROCESSING AND DISTRIBUTION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both appeals of Revenue are dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07

TDS on commission for non- whole time directors arises at the end of the financial year. ITA Nos.1124/Kol/2010 & C.O.No.78/Kol/2010 A.Y. 2006-07 DCIT. Cir-8, Kol. vs. M/s Tata Ryerson Ltd. ITA Nos.379&303/Kol/2012 A.Y.2008-09 Page 8 2 (a) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in holding that provision for leave

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TATA RYERSON LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both appeals of Revenue are dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07

TDS on commission for non- whole time directors arises at the end of the financial year. ITA Nos.1124/Kol/2010 & C.O.No.78/Kol/2010 A.Y. 2006-07 DCIT. Cir-8, Kol. vs. M/s Tata Ryerson Ltd. ITA Nos.379&303/Kol/2012 A.Y.2008-09 Page 8 2 (a) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in holding that provision for leave