VESUVIUS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 10,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

section 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act. 16. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to Ld. CIT (A). The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) submitted as under: 1. There was sufficient internal accrual during the F.Y. ending 31.03.2005 and 31.03.2006 respectively for Rs. 89,71,65,000/- and Rs. 1019969000/-. All the investments in the capital work in progress

D.C.I.T CIR - 10,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S VESUVIUS INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

section 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act. 16. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to Ld. CIT (A). The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) submitted as under: 1. There was sufficient internal accrual during the F.Y. ending 31.03.2005 and 31.03.2006 respectively for Rs. 89,71,65,000/- and Rs. 1019969000/-. All the investments in the capital work in progress

RANICHERRA TEA CO. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Year: 2017-18 Ranicherra Tea Co. Ltd. Ito, Ward-4(4), Kolkata. C/O, P. K. Himatsinghka & Co. 41, B. B. Ganguly Vs. Street, Central Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700012. (Pan: (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS thereon deducted from payment of interest. 9. That the appellant craves to add or amend any ground of appeal on or before the date of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed its return of income for the AY 2017-18 by showing total income at Rs.19,54,260/-. Subsequently, case of the assessee

THE PRINCIPAL, SALDIHA COLLEGE,BANKURA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(4), TDS, BANKURA & PURULIA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.2455/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Principal, Saldiha College Vs. Ito, Ward – 4(4), Tds Bankura & Purulia Saldiha, Bankura – 722 173. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaajs 5748 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23/12/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Durgapur Dated 30.07.2018 Passed In Case No.161/Cit(A)/Dgp/2017-18 Involving Proceedings U/S 200A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

TDS Bankura & Purulia Saldiha, Bankura – 722 173. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAAJS 5748 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 23/12/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 31/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara, JM This assessee’s appeal

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/

173/­ was unsustainable, and, therefore, the same is deleted. This limb of the ground accordingly stands allowed.” 14. The assessee duly explained to the Ld. CIT(A) that the TDS deducted by other parties was shown receivable by the assessee. However, due to non-supply of the requisite documents- TDS certificates etc by the concerned deductor, the assessee could

M/S KINNOR KINNOREE,KOLKATA vs. CIT-X, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

TDS has been made by the assessee. Therefore, all the above mentioned amounts were required to have been added to total income u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act, 1961. As per section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act if no tax was deducted from payment to contractors/sub-contractors u/s 194C, the expenditure was not deductible from the earnings

GLOSTER LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN AS KETTLEWELL BULLEN & CO. LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

section 74 of the Act 3 Gloster Ltd. AY 2018-19 rendering the assessment order to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 3.1. Pursuant to these two reasons, a notice u/s. 263 of the Act dated 12.12.2022 was issued on the assessee. Assessee furnished its reply objecting to the initiation of revisionary

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(2), JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal for A

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

173(3)/44/2009-IT(A-I)] dated 20.09.2010 relating to section 80P of the Act and also the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shree Choudhary Transport Co. vs Income Tax Officer in Civil Appeal No. 7865 of 2009 and has very cryptically mentioned that “In view of the above, it is mandatory for the appellant

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(2), JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal for A

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

173(3)/44/2009-IT(A-I)] dated 20.09.2010 relating to section 80P of the Act and also the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shree Choudhary Transport Co. vs Income Tax Officer in Civil Appeal No. 7865 of 2009 and has very cryptically mentioned that “In view of the above, it is mandatory for the appellant

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(1), JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal for A

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

173(3)/44/2009-IT(A-I)] dated 20.09.2010 relating to section 80P of the Act and also the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shree Choudhary Transport Co. vs Income Tax Officer in Civil Appeal No. 7865 of 2009 and has very cryptically mentioned that “In view of the above, it is mandatory for the appellant

TRIMURTI GRIHANIRMAN PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOL-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

TDS payment Challan is enclosed. 4. Kindly provide details and Bills and Vouchers for addition on Fixed Assets. Page 7 of 14 I.T.A. No.: 525/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Trimurti Grihanirman Pvt. Ltd. Reply: Details of addition on Fixed Assets along with bills is enclosed. Trimurti Grihanirman Pvt. Ltd. Financial Year: 2017-2018 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Details of Finance

ONLINE COMPUTER & SERVICES,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), DURGAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2019-20 Online Computer & Ito, Ward-1(1), Services Durgapur B-212, Bengal Shristi Vs. Complex, City Centre, Durgapur – 713 216. Pan: Aadfo 0585 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Kausik K. Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.06.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 10.08.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case The Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs. 1,27,428/- On Account Of Late Payment Of Pf & Esi When The Same Was Paid Within Time Allowed U/S 139(1) Of The Act & The Same May Be Please Be Allowed. 2. For That The Ao May Please Be Directed To Allow Credit Of Tds Of Rs. 18,591/- Relevant To The Year Under Appeal.”

TDS of Rs. 18,591/- relevant to the year under appeal.” 2. The registry has informed that the present appeal is time barred by 173 days. The assessee had filed an application prayed for condoning the delay which is placed on record. We after perusing the same find that the delay was due to ill health of the appellant representative

EIH LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

173/-. (iv) Alleged failure to consider revised computation withdrawing the claim of education cess of Rs. 1,74,38,807/- and of short credit of TDS amounting to Rs. 8,73,363/-. (v) Interest charged u/s 234B/C of the Act. 8.1 Regarding the issue of arm’s length pricing of CG a detailed finding has been given in para

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

173/-. (iv) Alleged failure to consider revised computation withdrawing the claim of education cess of Rs. 1,74,38,807/- and of short credit of TDS amounting to Rs. 8,73,363/-. (v) Interest charged u/s 234B/C of the Act. 8.1 Regarding the issue of arm’s length pricing of CG a detailed finding has been given in para

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

173 1. We have heard Mr. Balbir Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the petitioners. 2. It is not in dispute that the assessment was sought to be reopened beyond four years. Therefore, all the conditions under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for reopening the assessment beyond four years are required to be satisfied

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,DCIT, CIR. 8(1) vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

173 1. We have heard Mr. Balbir Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the petitioners. 2. It is not in dispute that the assessment was sought to be reopened beyond four years. Therefore, all the conditions under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for reopening the assessment beyond four years are required to be satisfied

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

173 1. We have heard Mr. Balbir Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the petitioners. 2. It is not in dispute that the assessment was sought to be reopened beyond four years. Therefore, all the conditions under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for reopening the assessment beyond four years are required to be satisfied

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

173 1. We have heard Mr. Balbir Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the petitioners. 2. It is not in dispute that the assessment was sought to be reopened beyond four years. Therefore, all the conditions under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for reopening the assessment beyond four years are required to be satisfied