ACIT, LTU - 2, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. M/S Uco Bank Acit, Ltu-2, Kolkata 10, Btm, Sarani, Kolkata – 700001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu3561B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS provisions, the assessee could be declared to be an assessee in default under section 201, but no disallowance could be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia). 4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. Although the ld. D.R. has relied on the decision

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (IT) - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the Ground Nos. (iv) to (vi) raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 503/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 505/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. -Vs- Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS thereon). • During the year under consideration, the Bank has made payments to the employees amounting to Rs 4.09 crore towards such unfunded pension liability. the payment has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the Bank, the same has been claimed as deduction by the Bank under Section 37(1

DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V., KOLKATA

Accordingly, the Ground Nos. (iv) to (vi) raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 503/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 505/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. -Vs- Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS thereon). • During the year under consideration, the Bank has made payments to the employees amounting to Rs 4.09 crore towards such unfunded pension liability. the payment has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the Bank, the same has been claimed as deduction by the Bank under Section 37(1

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

TDS as applicable u/s. 192 of the Act. According to him, calculation of perquisite is done as per Section 17(2)(vi) read with Rule 3(8) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. In this respect all the details relating to name, address, PAN of employees and the calculation of perquisites were submitted before the Ld. AO. It was stated

ACIT, CIR-40, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SUNDARLAL MOHANLAL SARDA & OTHERS, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :007-08

161 ITR 316 ii) Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs ITO 236 ITR 34 (SC). 4.3 Finally the AO held that proceedings u/s 147 of the Act had been initiated in accordance with the provisions of law and rejected the petition of the assessee. Being aggrieved by the order of AO the assessee preferred an appeal before

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

TDS thereon). • During the year under consideration, the Bank has made payments to the employees amounting to Rs 4.09 crore towards such unfunded pension liability. the payment has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the Bank, the same has been claimed as deduction by the Bank under Section 37(1

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. ADD.CIT,RANGE-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

1,57,227 in respect of indirect expenses attributed to the earning of dividends, and it has even the case of revenue that this disallowance for indirect expenses is unfair or unreasonable. 10. In view of the above discussions, while uphold the conclusions arrived at by the learned CIT(A), we also make it clear that, in our humble understanding

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 36 & 1885/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. -Vs- Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS thereon). • During the year under consideration, the Bank has made payments to the employees amounting to Rs 5.38 crore towards such unfunded pension liability. the payment has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the Bank, the same has been claimed as deduction by the Bank under Section 37(1

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 36 & 1885/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. -Vs- Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS thereon). • During the year under consideration, the Bank has made payments to the employees amounting to Rs 5.38 crore towards such unfunded pension liability. the payment has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the Bank, the same has been claimed as deduction by the Bank under Section 37(1

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GOODRICK GROUP LTD., KOLKATA

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

TDS certificate u/s. 195(1) of the Act. We find no merit in the instant argument. The fact remains that there is no material on record indicating the assessee’s payees to have rendered any service in India so as to be assessable in India. Hon'ble ITA No.2086-2088/Kol/2016 AYs 09-10 to 11-12 ACIT, Cir-4(1

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GOODRICK GROUP LTD., KOLKATA

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

TDS certificate u/s. 195(1) of the Act. We find no merit in the instant argument. The fact remains that there is no material on record indicating the assessee’s payees to have rendered any service in India so as to be assessable in India. Hon'ble ITA No.2086-2088/Kol/2016 AYs 09-10 to 11-12 ACIT, Cir-4(1

ANUP NAYAK,ASANSOL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.120/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anup Nayak………...……………………..…………………....Appellant 161, P N Malia Road, Raniganj, West Bengal – 713325. [Pan: Adfpn8917M] Vs. Cit(A), Delhi……………..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Bonnie Debbarma, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 23, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25.07.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals). Kolkata [In Short Cit(A)] Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2012-13, Confirming The Demand Raised Under Section 201(1) Read With Section 201(1A) Of The Act 2. Brief Facts Of The Case The Assessee Is Engaged In The Contractual Business Of Mining Work & Trading. During The Relevant Financial Year 2011-12, The Assessee Failed To Deduct Tax At Source (Tds) As Required Under Chapter Xvii-B Of The Income-Tax Act & Also Failed To File Tds Returns, On Scrutiny, It Was Found That The Assessee Had Debited The Following Expenditures In Its Profit & Loss Account Without Deduction Of Tax At Source: Dumper Hire Charges: Rs.8,42,365 Lease Rent: Rs.23,27,000

161, P N Malia Road, Raniganj, West Bengal – 713325. [PAN: ADFPN8917M] vs. CIT(A), Delhi……………..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Bonnie Debbarma, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : July 22, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : July 23, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This

TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2016-17

1) and on the other hand, a contingent one for the purpose of TDS. Ld. CIT(A) thus upheld the disallowance of the additional royalty payable to KOPT made by the Ld. AO by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. T M International Logistics Ltd., AYs 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17 5. Ld. Counsel

TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2016-17

1) and on the other hand, a contingent one for the purpose of TDS. Ld. CIT(A) thus upheld the disallowance of the additional royalty payable to KOPT made by the Ld. AO by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. T M International Logistics Ltd., AYs 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17 5. Ld. Counsel

TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2016-17

1) and on the other hand, a contingent one for the purpose of TDS. Ld. CIT(A) thus upheld the disallowance of the additional royalty payable to KOPT made by the Ld. AO by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. T M International Logistics Ltd., AYs 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17 5. Ld. Counsel

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

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 STEEL PROCESSING & DISTRIBUTION 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