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’).

B-Bench Kol, dated 31" March 2022 in ITA No-73/Kol/2020) vi. For that and under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law CIT(A)-12 Kol, while passing an order in absence of the appellate/assessee should have noted the fact whether the copy of "Reason to believe of escapement of income “ was duly served

DEPUTY COMMISSOENR OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

B” Bench in the case of M/s Ashtvinayak Sales Pvt. Ltd.. vs ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata for AY: 2019-20 in IT(SS)A No.54/Kol/2022. In the instant appeal being adjudicated, it has already been discussed in detail earlier that the assessee submitted the requisite documents to prove the identity, creditworthiness of the share applicants, the genuineness

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

B” Bench in the case of M/s Ashtvinayak Sales Pvt. Ltd.. vs ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata for AY: 2019-20 in IT(SS)A No.54/Kol/2022. In the instant appeal being adjudicated, it has already been discussed in detail earlier that the assessee submitted the requisite documents to prove the identity, creditworthiness of the share applicants, the genuineness

KRYPTON DISTRIBUTORS LLP (EARLIER KNOWN AS KRYPTON DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 12(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Krypton Distributors Llp (Earlier Known As Krypton Ito, Ward 12(1), Distributors P. Ltd.) Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Flat No.1A, 1, Abdul Rasul Chowringhee Square, Vs. Avenue, Kalighat, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Kolkata-700026, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadck5298G Assessee By : Shri Manoj Katuruka, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.12.2025

B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM Krypton Distributors LLP (Earlier known as Krypton ITO, Ward 12(1), Distributors P. Ltd.) Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Flat No.1A, 1, Abdul Rasul Chowringhee Square, Vs. Avenue, Kalighat, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Kolkata-700026, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCK5298G Assessee by : Shri Manoj Katuruka

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WELKIN TELECOM INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav (Vice President), Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member)

TDS was also withheld while making payment. 6.14 The appellant has multiple sites of work and the same is acknowledged by the learned Assessing Officer as well. The appellant filed supporting documents such as bills, bank statement depicting payment made to service providers. The underlined expenses are very well business expenses in nature. The appellant also filed copy of agreement

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue on this issue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2126&2625/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009 & 2009-2010) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Eureka Forbes Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-10, 7, Chakraberia Road (S), P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700025 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaace 5767 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Niraj Kumar, Cit Dr Assessee By : Dr. Samir Chakraborty, Sr. Advocate & Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am:

149 lakhs to the subsidiary company for its working capital requirements. But the subsidiary company was continuously making losses. Therefore, the management of the assessee company decided to come out of the affairs of the subsidiary company and thus transferred its shares. As the subsidiary company was making losses only, therefore, the assessee company could not recover its advances

D.C.I.T CIR - 10,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBES LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue on this issue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2126&2625/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009 & 2009-2010) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Eureka Forbes Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-10, 7, Chakraberia Road (S), P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700025 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaace 5767 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Niraj Kumar, Cit Dr Assessee By : Dr. Samir Chakraborty, Sr. Advocate & Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am:

149 lakhs to the subsidiary company for its working capital requirements. But the subsidiary company was continuously making losses. Therefore, the management of the assessee company decided to come out of the affairs of the subsidiary company and thus transferred its shares. As the subsidiary company was making losses only, therefore, the assessee company could not recover its advances

SHELTER INFRA PROJECTS LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. A.O. CIR. 11(1), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.421/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shelter Infra Projects Ltd…….…....…………….......…....………....Appellant Dn-1 Sector V Eternity Building, Sector V, Salt Lake Sech Bhavan, Kolkata – 700091. [Pan: Aabcc2304F] Vs. A.O, Circle-11(1), Kolkata......................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 11, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 10, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. This Is Second Round Of Appeal Before Us. Earlier, The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 12.10.2018 Had Remanded The Matter To The File Of The Assessing Officer For De Novo Assessment. Thereafter, The Assessing Officer Vide Order Dated 31.12.2019 Made The Impugned Additions Assessing The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.23,98,20,955/-. The Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Additions So Made By The Assessing Officer Vide

section 201 of the Act certifying the aforesaid payment to M/s Sarda Vanijya (P) Ltd. by the assessee and TDS was duly deducted thereupon and further that the payee had duly taken into consideration the aforesaid payments in its return of income. The ld. counsel has also invited our attention to pages 87 & 88 of the paper-book to submit

M/S INDUSTRIAL PERFORATION INDIA (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O. WD - 5(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

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

B of the Income-tax Act; a person is required to deduct tax on certain specified payments at the specified rates if the payment exceeds specified threshold. In case of non- deduction of tax in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter, he is deemed to be an assessee in default under section 201(1) in respect of the amount

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS was availed and based upon the confirmation from the bank, which was pending at the time of assessment and which must have been received by now, and after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after considering its submission, re-adjudicate this issue on the basis of facts and as per law. The assessee claims that

M/S COAL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

149 taxmann.com 181 (Calcutta) f. Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. DCIT (2005) 92 ITD 119 (Del) (A. Y. 1999- 2000) g. Jindal Saw Pipes Ltd. [2008] 118 TTJ 228 (Delhi) h. ACIT v. Eicher Ltd. [(2006) 101 TTJ 369 (Del)] i. Impulse (India) (P) Ltd v. ACIT[(2008) 22 SOT 368 (Del)] 7.7 It is also submitted that no disallowance

WELKIN TELECOM INFRA PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rjesh Kumar, Am ]

B” BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri Rjesh Kumar, AM ] I.T.A. No. 12/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Welkin Telecom Infra (Pvt.) Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, (PAN: AAJCS6622G) Circle-11(1), Kolkata Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 25.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement 18.04.2022 For the Appellant Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate For the Respondent Smt. Ranu

VISHAL PACHISIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WD-44(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

TDS by the deductor cannot be fasten on the deductee. For the sake of convenience, we are reproducing herein Page 4 of 7 I.T.A. No.: 764/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vishal Pachisia. the operative part of the decision in the case of Mukesh Padamchand Sogani (supra) wherein the Coordinate Bench under the similar circumstances has held as under

JCIT(OSD), CIR-11(1), KOLAKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KRM INTERNATIONAL LTD., KOLKATA

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

4. K.P. Traders 3162 5. M.R.Enterprises 2526 6. Royal Leather 19882 7. Sarda Garments 3600 8. Sri Shiva Sakthi Leathers 2901 9. Wasan & Co. 35656.01 10. Mahadev Industries 734 11. Vivek Footweare Pvt. Ltd 2881 1118300.01 849596.49 7351155.00 (E) Amount remitted to Prague, Czech Republic during Period when we were maintain an office here. The Expenditures for which could

JCIT(OSD), CIR-11(1), KOLAKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KRM INTERNATIONAL LTD., KOLKATA

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

4. K.P. Traders 3162 5. M.R.Enterprises 2526 6. Royal Leather 19882 7. Sarda Garments 3600 8. Sri Shiva Sakthi Leathers 2901 9. Wasan & Co. 35656.01 10. Mahadev Industries 734 11. Vivek Footweare Pvt. Ltd 2881 1118300.01 849596.49 7351155.00 (E) Amount remitted to Prague, Czech Republic during Period when we were maintain an office here. The Expenditures for which could

JCIT(OSD), CIR-11(1), KOLAKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KRM INTERNATIONAL LTD., KOLKATA

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

4. K.P. Traders 3162 5. M.R.Enterprises 2526 6. Royal Leather 19882 7. Sarda Garments 3600 8. Sri Shiva Sakthi Leathers 2901 9. Wasan & Co. 35656.01 10. Mahadev Industries 734 11. Vivek Footweare Pvt. Ltd 2881 1118300.01 849596.49 7351155.00 (E) Amount remitted to Prague, Czech Republic during Period when we were maintain an office here. The Expenditures for which could

JCIT(OSD), CIR-11(1), KOLAKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KRM INTERNATIONAL LTD., KOLKATA

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

4. K.P. Traders 3162 5. M.R.Enterprises 2526 6. Royal Leather 19882 7. Sarda Garments 3600 8. Sri Shiva Sakthi Leathers 2901 9. Wasan & Co. 35656.01 10. Mahadev Industries 734 11. Vivek Footweare Pvt. Ltd 2881 1118300.01 849596.49 7351155.00 (E) Amount remitted to Prague, Czech Republic during Period when we were maintain an office here. The Expenditures for which could

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS was availed and based upon the confirmation from the bank, which was pending at the time of assessment and which must have been received by now, and after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after considering its submission, re-adjudicate this issue on the basis of facts and as per law. The assessee claims that

M/S. SALARPURIA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

TDS certificates and other evidences as may be furnished by the assessee in respect of its claim. Accordingly the ground no. 3 is allowed for statistical purposes. 3.7. The issue raised in ground no. 4 is in respect of allowability of MAT credit of taxes of earlier years from AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 amounting