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

194A. vi. That on the facts of the case Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.8,28,655/- on a wrong appreciation of facts ignoring the provisions laid down in section 194J in the It Act, 1961. vii. That the appellant craves to add, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal before

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. WEST BENGAL HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE DEV. CORPN. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.213/Kol/2012 of the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2005-06

TDS Provisions under Section 194A had not been applicable to the payments made by the appellant.” 3. The assessee is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The entire shares of the assessee are owned by Government of West Bengal. All the directors of the assessee are nominated by the Government of West Bengal. The assessee was formed

WEST BENGAL HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.213/Kol/2012 of the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2005-06

TDS Provisions under Section 194A had not been applicable to the payments made by the appellant.” 3. The assessee is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The entire shares of the assessee are owned by Government of West Bengal. All the directors of the assessee are nominated by the Government of West Bengal. The assessee was formed

WEST BENGAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE I.T.O, WARD-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.213/Kol/2012 of the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2005-06

TDS Provisions under Section 194A had not been applicable to the payments made by the appellant.” 3. The assessee is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The entire shares of the assessee are owned by Government of West Bengal. All the directors of the assessee are nominated by the Government of West Bengal. The assessee was formed

HARBHAJAN SINGH,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O WD - 1(4),KOLKATA, ASANSOL

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

iv) Rudra Motor 29,577/- 2,10,184/- The AO observed that interest expense has been claimed by assessee without deducting TDS u/s. 194A of the Act and he accordingly disallowed the same and added back to the total income of assessee. 10. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who gave relief to assessee in part

SRI HARTAJ SEWA SINGH,KOLKATA vs. DCIT(IT), CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13

iv. Advising the Mandator in evaluating, negotiating, finalizing and closing the Transaction. v. Advising the Mandator in structuring the Transaction to mitigate risks with respect to financial, regulatory, legal and taxation etc. vi. Any other assistance as required not covered above would be provided subject to mutual agreement and in keeping with the exigencies of successful completion of this Mandate

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

TDS and also has failed to produce the persons to whom these payments were made, therefore the expenses on account of bill discounting and serves charges amounting to Rs.1,45,654/- is disallowed. The addition made by the Assessing Officer is upheld and this ground of appeal is dismissed. 16. Before us, the ld.AR contended that the section 194H

ARABINDA ROY,HOOGHLY vs. C.I.T KOLKATA - XX, HOOGHLY

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2008-09

TDS on the payment of interest of Rs.15,000 each paid/ payable to the four loan creditors. The assessee also submitted that the provisions of Section 194A is not applicable to it. It was submitted that the receipt of ₹3.5 lakh from three parties is (ii) reflecting the sale of potato. Assessee was not under any obligation to check

RAMNATH JHUNJHUNWALA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 40(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year:2012-13

194A of the Act. 7. However, Ld. CIT in his order passed u/s 263 of the Act held the order of AO as erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue by observing as under:- “5. I have carefully examined the assessment record and submissions made by the assessee. The impugned assessment order dated 26.02.2015 has been

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

194A was deducted by these parties which proves that they have not provided for any interest payment in their books of accounts. The Learned 2 Ganapati Technology Services Private Limited Assessing Officer issued show cause notice on 23/11/2018 which stated to substantiate the source of investment made in Reliance Yield Maximiser and documentary evidence in order to substantiate non charging

ITO, WD-41(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SAJJAN KUMAR SHARMA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] I.T.A No.687/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2007-08

194A of the act, and where such tax has not been deducted or after deducted has not been paid; (A) in a case where the tax was deductible and was so deducted during the last month of the previous year, on or before the due date specified in sub-section (1) of section 139 ; or (B) in any other case

M/S. HOOGHLY MILLS PROJECTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narsimha Charyassessment Years:2006-07

section 143(3) of the Act as detailed under :- 1) Assessee was holding the beneficial share of M/s Mega Resources Ltd. (MMRL for short) having more than 10% of the voting rights and accordingly the provision of sec. 2(22)(e) were attracted on the amount of loan received by assessee from MMRL. The Assessing Officer at the time

I.T.O WD - 8(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RUIA SONS PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-8(3), -Vs.- M/S. Ruia Sons Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaccr 3949 Q] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

194A, 194C, 194 H, 194- I, and 194 J either at the time of payment or at the time of giving credit to the recipient, section 40(a)(ia) is not applicable. In view of the decision of the Special Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT, Vishakhapatnam (supra) relied upon by the appellant and also in view of the ratio

SHRI KISHAN SARAF,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 45, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2265/Kol/2014 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. A.C.I.T, Cir-45, Kolkata. Shri Kishan Saraf Krishna Building, Room No.817, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata – 224, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – 700 001. 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Akups4979 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.27/Kol/2015 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 A.C.I.T, Cir-45, Kolkata. Vs. Shri Kishan Saraf Krishna Building, Room No.817, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata 224, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – – 700 001. 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Akups 4979 C (Revenue) .. (Assessee) Assesseeby : Shri S.D Varma, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Acit, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Cross-Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Are Directed Against An Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, Kolkata In Appeal No.238/Cit(A)- Xxx/Cir-45/2013-14, Dated 29.10.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed

section 143(3)/263/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), dated 31.01.2014. 2. Since these two cross-appeals relate to same assessee, same Assessment Year, identical issues involved, therefore, these have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The grounds

ACIT, CIRCLE-45, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI KISHAN SARAF, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2265/Kol/2014 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. A.C.I.T, Cir-45, Kolkata. Shri Kishan Saraf Krishna Building, Room No.817, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata – 224, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – 700 001. 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Akups4979 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.27/Kol/2015 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 A.C.I.T, Cir-45, Kolkata. Vs. Shri Kishan Saraf Krishna Building, Room No.817, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata 224, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – – 700 001. 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Akups 4979 C (Revenue) .. (Assessee) Assesseeby : Shri S.D Varma, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Acit, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Cross-Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Are Directed Against An Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, Kolkata In Appeal No.238/Cit(A)- Xxx/Cir-45/2013-14, Dated 29.10.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed

section 143(3)/263/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), dated 31.01.2014. 2. Since these two cross-appeals relate to same assessee, same Assessment Year, identical issues involved, therefore, these have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The grounds

BISHNU OIL COMPANY ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 31(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2013-14

194A of the Act. In appeal the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same. The case of the assessee is this that the assessee is not in default for the purpose of section 40(a)(ia) and thus no disallowance can be made in respect of interest so paid without deduction of tax if the tax is duly paid

CITYSTAR GANGULY PROJECTS LLP,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 9, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm ]

Section 133(6) was in fact carried out by the AO from the said party and evidence in support of compliance made by the said party was also furnished before the ld. Pr. CIT. We therefore note that since the evidence led by the assessee in this regard was found to be factually true, 6 I.T.A No.1103/Kol/2019

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. DREAM BAKE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

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

IV to clause - 18 for the year ended on 31.03.2012 has not declared any amount of transactions actually held between said two related companies under the caption "Particulars of payments made to persons specified under Section 40S(2)(b)". 1.2 The assessee has filed a written contention opposing the view taken to treat the loan/ advance