DARJEELING DISTRICT CENTRAL CO.OP. BANK LTD. ,DARJEELING vs. ACIT(OSD)(TDS)WD-5(3), DARJEELING, , DARJEELING.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS u/s. 194A of the Act and/or whether the exclusive provisions mentioned in clause (v) of sec. 194A(3) of the Act are applicable to the Cooperative Bank when interest is paid to a co-operative society which is also a member of the State Cooperative Bank. It is stated that both the lower authorities misunderstood the provisions of section

DARJEELING DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD. ,DARJEELING vs. ACIT, CIR-3(1),SILIGURI. , SILIGURI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS u/s. 194A of the Act and/or whether the exclusive provisions mentioned in clause (v) of sec. 194A(3) of the Act are applicable to the Cooperative Bank when interest is paid to a co-operative society which is also a member of the State Cooperative Bank. It is stated that both the lower authorities misunderstood the provisions of section

M/S. HOOGHLY DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,HOOGHLY vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 23(), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

194A of the Act. But in those cases for which Form 15G & 15H are received form the depositors tax at source is not deducted. The assessee bank regularly receives Form 15G & 15H and submits the same to the jurisdictional officer in charge of TDS. For the year under appeal there was a change in systems and the assessee was required

M/S. HOOGHLY DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,HOOGHLY vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 23(), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

194A of the Act. But in those cases for which Form 15G & 15H are received form the depositors tax at source is not deducted. The assessee bank regularly receives Form 15G & 15H and submits the same to the jurisdictional officer in charge of TDS. For the year under appeal there was a change in systems and the assessee was required

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

TDS of 274,795/-\nwas duly deducted under Section 194A of the Act. (Page-90)\nDuring the course of the assessment

M/S STANDARD FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.7(2), KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

TDS has been deducted at source from the said interest. We note that the said interest has not been incurred by the assessee on any amount borrowed during the normal course of business and therefore, cannot be considered as interest u/s 2(28A) of the Act. In our opinion, the provision of Section 194A

GANAPATI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 485/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Ganapati Technology Services Pvt. Ltd.,…Appellant 6B, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Sarani, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aadcg2354D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-6(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kadel, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 21, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

TDS under section 194A was deducted by these parties which proves that they have not provided for any interest payment

M/S. BANKURA DISTRICT CENTRAL CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD. ,BANKURA vs. ITO,WARD-4(4),TDS, BANKURA. , BANKURA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy]

TDS by the assessee. The AO also noted that assessee has not furnished Form 15G/15H with the competent authority and finally came to the conclusion that there was a violation of section 194A

M/S. SHREE PRAKASH TRACON PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 5(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm M/S Shree Prakash Tracon Pvt. Income Tax Officer, Ltd. Ward 591), Kokata P-7, Room No. 301/A/1, Avani Chowringhee Square, Aaykar Vs. Signature, 91/A/1, Park Street, Bhavan,Kolkata-700069 Kolkata-700016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aakcs7629A Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradip Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2024

Section 148A of the Act dated 07/04/2022, stating there that the notice issued u/s 148A(b) was not complied with till 25.03.2022 and the income to the tune of ₹2,23,23,329/- has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2018-19 on account of TDS (1941) Rent for BNB Paribas, Time Deposits and TDS (194A

M/S. B.R. DUTTA,RAMPURHAT, BIRBHUM vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), SURI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddym/S B R Dutta Vs Ito, Ward-3(1), Suri-731101 Shibtalla Para, Rampurhat, Birbhum-731224 Pan No. :Aahfb 7626 E (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri A.K.Tibrewal, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 08.11.2024 Passed For Assessment Year 2014-15, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 13,60,796 Made By Ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Suri Invoking The Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For Failure Of The Assessee To Deduct Tax At Source On The Payments Made To Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Although The Said Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Had Declared The Receipt Of Income In Their Return Of Income & Paid Taxes Thereon. 2. That The Impugned Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Against Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Was Filed Return Of Income Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.3,90,520/-. The Assessee Is A Wholesaler/Distributor Of Fertilizer, Pesticides & Maintains Regular Books Of A/Cs. Which Is Audited U/S. 44Ab Of The 1.T. Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Debited As Amount Of 13,60,796/- To The Profit & Loss A/C. For Payment Of 2

TDS had been made on payment of interest of Rs.13,60,796/-. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the said amount u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. Against the said disallowance, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee affirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s.40

DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE 2(3), KOLKATA vs. LUMINO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MERLIN ACROPOLIS, E.K.T.

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1223/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Kolkata........................…...........................……….……Appellant Vs. Lumino Industries Ltd……………………............…..….…..….......……...…..…..Respondent Unit No.12/4, Merlin Acropolis, E.K.T., Kol-700107. [Pan: Aaacd9817H] C.O No.57/Kol/2025 (In I.T.A. No.1223/Kol/2025) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Lumino Industries Ltd.......................................................................……….…Cross-Objector Unit No.12/4, Merlin Acropolis, E.K.T., Kol-700107. [Pan: Aaacd9817H] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Kolkata ……………….…..….......……..…...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. N. Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 16, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue & Cross Objections D By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) – 26, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 27.03.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Ay 2014-15. 02. At The Outset, We Note That There Is A Delay In Filing Of The Appeal By 7 Days By The Revenue, For Which, Condonation Petition Has Been Filed. After Hearing Both The Parties & Perusing The Contents Of The Condonation Application Filed By The Revenue, We Are Of The View That The

section 133 (6) of the Act which fact has not been denied by the assessing officer. On going through the records and the net worth of the lender companies, the CIT has recorded the factual findings that the net worth of those companies is in crores of rupees and they have declared income to the tune

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. CENTURY ALUMINIUM MFG COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-13(1), Kolkata……….……………… …………….……….……Appellant Vs. Century Aluminium Mfg Company Ltd..…….………….......……...…..…..Respondent Raja Road, P.O. Sukchar, Barrackpur-Ii, 24 Parganas, W.B-700115.. [Pan: Aabcc2200Q] Appearances By: Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.07.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012–13. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 25 Days. The Revenue Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Petition For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits. Century Aluminium Mfg Company Ltd

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2012–13. 2. The appeal has been filed by the revenue with a delay of 25 days. The revenue has filed a petition for condonation of the delay. After considering the reasons cited in the petition for condonation of delay, we find

TURNER MORRISON LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR, KOL, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2020-21

194A, 194B and 194BB, respectively. 8.2 Likewise, payments made to contractors and insurance commission, payments made in respect of life insurance policy, and payments made to the non-resident sportsmen or sports associations are liable for deduction to tax at source under Sections 194C, 194D, 194DA, and 194E, respectively. 8.3 As far as payments made to non-residents [not being

REACHASIA,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 29,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2012-13 Reachasia……………………..……………..............................……….……Appellant 109/28, Hazra Road, Kol- 700026. [Pan: Aagrf2430K] Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-29, Kolkata…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 01, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 03, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.02.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

section 147 and cannot be sustained. The case is squarely covered by the decision of ACIT vs. Ceat Tyres Ltd. reported in (2023) 146 taxmann.com 108 (SC). Accordingly, the reopening of the assessment is hereby quashed. 6. Even on merit, the assessee has very strong case. We note that the assessee has taken unsecured loans from two parties namely

MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

TDS should have been deducted at the rate of 10% u/s 194A of the Act. Finally, the AO disallowed 30% of the above interest payment being disallowance u/s 40a(ia) of the Act. In our opinion the provisions of Section

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA vs. EDMOND FINVEST PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

194A in respect of such interest. The appellant had also complied with provisions concerning filing of TDS returns. Loan creditors had disclosed interest income in their respective tax returns. Despite furnishing of information and documentary evidences in response to notices U/s 133(6) the AO did not bring on record even a single specific instance which established that the evidences

THE MURSHIDABAD DISTRICT CENTRAL CO. OP. BANK LTD.,MURSHIDABAD vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 459 & 460/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Murshidabad District Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, (Tds), Cir-1, Kolkata Central Co. Op. Bank Ltd. 48 & 49, B.B. Sen Road Berhampore – 742101 (Murshidabad) [Pan : Aabat2105M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dated 16/03/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Years 2016-17 & 2017-18. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of Eighty Seven (87) Days In Filing Of This Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons Of Delay. After Perusing The Same, We Find That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. Hence, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted. 3. On Perusal Of The Grounds, We Find That The Common Issue For Our Consideration Is That Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Sustaining The Action Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Of Treating The Assessee In Default U/S 201(1)/201(1A) Of The Act For Non-Deduction Of Tax At Source U/S 194A Of The

194A of the Act. But in those cases for which Form 15G & 15H are received form the depositors tax at source is not deducted. The assessee bank regularly receives Form 15G & 15H and submits the same to the jurisdictional officer in charge of TDS. For the year under appeal there was a change in systems and the assessee was required

THE MURSHIDABAD DISTRICT CENTRAL CO. OP. BANK LTD.,MURSHIDABAD vs. ACIT (TDS), CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 459 & 460/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Murshidabad District Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, (Tds), Cir-1, Kolkata Central Co. Op. Bank Ltd. 48 & 49, B.B. Sen Road Berhampore – 742101 (Murshidabad) [Pan : Aabat2105M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dated 16/03/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Years 2016-17 & 2017-18. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of Eighty Seven (87) Days In Filing Of This Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons Of Delay. After Perusing The Same, We Find That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. Hence, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted. 3. On Perusal Of The Grounds, We Find That The Common Issue For Our Consideration Is That Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Sustaining The Action Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Of Treating The Assessee In Default U/S 201(1)/201(1A) Of The Act For Non-Deduction Of Tax At Source U/S 194A Of The

194A of the Act. But in those cases for which Form 15G & 15H are received form the depositors tax at source is not deducted. The assessee bank regularly receives Form 15G & 15H and submits the same to the jurisdictional officer in charge of TDS. For the year under appeal there was a change in systems and the assessee was required

TIRIYOGI NARAYAN SINGH,1,GIBSON LANE, SUITE 213, 2ND FLOOR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-28, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, GARIAHAT ROAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1965/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Tiriyogi Narayan Singh, Vs Acit, Circle-28, Kolkata C/O: Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 Pan No. :Apmps 8395 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashutosh Kumar Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21/08/2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, On The Following Grounds :- 1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,82,18,524/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Oil & Fuel Expenses. 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs. 53,40,091/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Truck Running Expenses As Against 80,35,546/-Claimed By The Assessee. 3. (A) For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs. 3,71,736/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Finance Charges Paid For Acquisition Of Self Occupied House Property.

TDS. 5. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 10,20,499/- made by the A.O. on account of alleged difference in secured loan obtained from banks. 6. The appellant craves leave to add further grounds of appeal or alter the grounds