EXIMCORP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

TDS) under Section 195(1) of the Act against the amount paid to the local bank, equivalent to the usance interest purportedly paid by the local bank of the appellant to the foreign bank. There is no lis between the appellant and the foreign bank. 3

ACIT, CIRCLE - 13(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PADMA LOGISTICS & KHANIJ PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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]

195-196 and 178-200 of the paper book. From a perusal it is evident that the losses of the demerged unit was neither set off during the year nor was carried forward to subsequent years. 26. However, the AO did not accept and was of the opinion that since M/s SYK Limited has not filed a revised return forgoing

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S SHALIMAR WIRES INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14

3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the Revenue’s instant former grievance. There is no dispute about the assessee having paid the impugned commission amount to its overseas agents without deducting TDS. The Revenue reiterates the Assessing Officer’s findings that the assessee ought to have deducted TDS since it had not obtained any certificate

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.(HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCT LTD.,), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

195 casts a responsibility of making TOS' (at applicable rate) on other sums paid to a non-resident (not a company or a foreign company). From the aforementioned provisions of the extant law and the submissions of the appellant at the appellate stage, it is observed that such payments can be allowed as expenditure without effecting TDS, [or rather

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.(HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCT LTD.,), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

195 casts a responsibility of making TOS' (at applicable rate) on other sums paid to a non-resident (not a company or a foreign company). From the aforementioned provisions of the extant law and the submissions of the appellant at the appellate stage, it is observed that such payments can be allowed as expenditure without effecting TDS, [or rather

M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) WARD, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

TDS certificate is essential. Whether this contention is correct, is the issue to be decided. 6. 7. In order to appreciate this contention, it is necessary to consider the relevant provisions of the Act:— (i) Section 40(a) (i) of the Act:— "Section 40 - Amounts not deductible: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 38, the following amounts

ACIT, CIR-2, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LUX INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer towards export commission paid by the assessee to the non-resident was rightly deleted.' 16. When the transaction does not atract the provisions of Section 9 of the Act, then there is no question of applying Explanation 4 to Section 9 of the Act. Therefore

ACIT, CIR-2, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LUX INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

195 did not come into play. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer towards export commission paid by the assessee to the non-resident was rightly deleted.' 16. When the transaction does not atract the provisions of Section 9 of the Act, then there is no question of applying Explanation 4 to Section 9 of the Act. Therefore

SAHABUDDIN QUADIRI,MURSHIDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-42, MURSHIDABAD, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini[Assessment Year: 2010-11] Sahabuddin Quadiri, Vs Dcit, Saratpally, Chuanpur, Circle-42, Laldighi, 57, Berhampore, R.N.Tagore Road, Berhampore, Murshidabad-742101. Murshidabad-742101. Pan-Aaapq7976P (Assessee) (Respondent)

195 Therefore, order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed by the assessing officer after conducting thirteen hearings and after doing detailed scrutiny of books of accounts and evidences. During the assessment proceedings U/s 143(3), the assessee submitted a plethora of documents, evidences, books of accounts and explanations as required by ld AO by issuing notice under

ITO (IT), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2249/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2011-12 I.T.O. (International Taxation), -Vs.- M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaace 4975 B] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

TDS) [2010] 321 ITR 31/[2009] 182 Taxman 252 held that the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Ishikawajma-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra) still holds good despite the retrospective amendment to section 9 of the Act. In our opinion, the requirement of services of the non-resident being rendered in India and being utilized

ACIT, CIRCLE - 52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SUBHOTOSH MAJUMDER, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

TDS u/s. 195 of the Act thereby invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act. For this, revenue has raised common grounds and the grounds as raised in AY 2006-07 read as under: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and circumstances of case, by considering that the amount

DCIT,CIRCLE-52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI SUBHOTOSH MAJUMDER . S. JAMUMBDER &CO,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

TDS u/s. 195 of the Act thereby invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act. For this, revenue has raised common grounds and the grounds as raised in AY 2006-07 read as under: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and circumstances of case, by considering that the amount

ACIT, CIRCLE - 52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SUBHOTOSH MAJUMDAR, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

TDS u/s. 195 of the Act thereby invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act. For this, revenue has raised common grounds and the grounds as raised in AY 2006-07 read as under: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and circumstances of case, by considering that the amount

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

3 August 2009. 7. The following issues were raised by the AO during the course of the assessment proceedings:- I. Issue of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, of payments made to the Indian sub consultants, for delay in deposit of TDS effected on such payments, under section 194J of the Act. As we have already seen

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

3 August 2009. 7. The following issues were raised by the AO during the course of the assessment proceedings:- I. Issue of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, of payments made to the Indian sub consultants, for delay in deposit of TDS effected on such payments, under section 194J of the Act. As we have already seen

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. E.I.H. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA NO

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

195 and the assessee had failed to deduct such tax. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(Appeals) erred in not considering that legal fees and other professional fees rendered from outside India is not taxable in India even under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. “ 3.2. The Learned AR stated

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

TDS deduction at source as contained u/s 195 of the Act are not applicable to the assessee. The Ld. A.R argued that the provisions of Section 40a(i) of the Act are attracted where the assessee fails to deduct tax at source from any payment or from any sum chargeable to tax in India which is payable outside India

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

TDS deduction at source as contained u/s 195 of the Act are not applicable to the assessee. The Ld. A.R argued that the provisions of Section 40a(i) of the Act are attracted where the assessee fails to deduct tax at source from any payment or from any sum chargeable to tax in India which is payable outside India