BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

226; (i) to furnish a statement as required by sub-section (2C) of section 192; (j) to deliver or cause to be delivered in due time a copy of the declaration referred to in sub- section (1A) of section 206C; (k) to deliver or cause to be delivered a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub- section

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

226; (i) to furnish a statement as required by sub-section (2C) of section 192; (j) to deliver or cause to be delivered in due time a copy of the declaration referred to in sub- section (1A) of section 206C; (k) to deliver or cause to be delivered a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub- section

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

226; (i) to furnish a statement as required by sub-section (2C) of section 192; (j) to deliver or cause to be delivered in due time a copy of the declaration referred to in sub- section (1A) of section 206C; (k) to deliver or cause to be delivered a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub- section

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

226; (i) to furnish a statement as required by sub-section (2C) of section 192; (j) to deliver or cause to be delivered in due time a copy of the declaration referred to in sub- section (1A) of section 206C; (k) to deliver or cause to be delivered a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub- section

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

226; (i) to furnish a statement as required by sub-section (2C) of section 192; (j) to deliver or cause to be delivered in due time a copy of the declaration referred to in sub- section (1A) of section 206C; (k) to deliver or cause to be delivered a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub- section

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

226; (i) to furnish a statement as required by sub-section (2C) of section 192; (j) to deliver or cause to be delivered in due time a copy of the declaration referred to in sub- section (1A) of section 206C; (k) to deliver or cause to be delivered a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub- section

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

226; (i) to furnish a statement as required by sub-section (2C) of section 192; (j) to deliver or cause to be delivered in due time a copy of the declaration referred to in sub- section (1A) of section 206C; (k) to deliver or cause to be delivered a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub- section

A.C.I.T(TDS) CIR - 57,KOL, KOLKATA vs. M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

3)Slg./DCIT((TDS) Cir-57 Kol. Page 12 examine each of payment made by assessee company in the case of “Fees for Professional services” and in case where “Fees for Professional Services” exceeds Rs.20,000/- then only TDS provisions u/s. 194J should be applied. Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to amend his order

HERIGAGE HEALTH TPA(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT(TDS), CIRCLE -57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

3)Slg./DCIT((TDS) Cir-57 Kol. Page 12 examine each of payment made by assessee company in the case of “Fees for Professional services” and in case where “Fees for Professional Services” exceeds Rs.20,000/- then only TDS provisions u/s. 194J should be applied. Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to amend his order

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

3)Slg./DCIT((TDS) Cir-57 Kol. Page 12 examine each of payment made by assessee company in the case of “Fees for Professional services” and in case where “Fees for Professional Services” exceeds Rs.20,000/- then only TDS provisions u/s. 194J should be applied. Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to amend his order

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

3)Slg./DCIT((TDS) Cir-57 Kol. Page 12 examine each of payment made by assessee company in the case of “Fees for Professional services” and in case where “Fees for Professional Services” exceeds Rs.20,000/- then only TDS provisions u/s. 194J should be applied. Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to amend his order

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-57(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

3)Slg./DCIT((TDS) Cir-57 Kol. Page 12 examine each of payment made by assessee company in the case of “Fees for Professional services” and in case where “Fees for Professional Services” exceeds Rs.20,000/- then only TDS provisions u/s. 194J should be applied. Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to amend his order

M/S PREMIER IRRIGATION ADRITEC (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

3. In this Ground of Appeal the Assessee claimed deduction of interest on delayed deposit of Tax Deducted at Source. The Assessee had relied on various judgements rendered by Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal and Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal. The Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal had allowed such claim in the case of NarayaniIspat Alloys Ltd. and the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal

SHREYANS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

3(2), Kolkata vide reply dated 13/12/2016 informed the Ld. AO that the TDS exemption certificate was not issued by his office. On this ground, the Ld. AO made the addition. The assessee also relied upon the decision of Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC) in support of its argument, and also relied

SHREYANS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

3(2), Kolkata vide reply dated 13/12/2016 informed the Ld. AO that the TDS exemption certificate was not issued by his office. On this ground, the Ld. AO made the addition. The assessee also relied upon the decision of Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC) in support of its argument, and also relied

M/S BALMER LAWRIES & CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(IT) WD-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. V/S. Income Tax Officer Ltd., 21, N.S.Road, (International Taxation), Kolkata-700 001 Ward-1(1), Aayakar [Pan No. Aabcb 0984 E] Bhawan (Poorva), 2Nd Floor, R. No.215, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata- 700 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri M.K.Poddar, Sr-Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.P.Bhatia, Jcit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-02-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

TDS applies only to those sums which are chargeable to tax under the Income-tax Act. If the contention of the Department that any person making payment to a non-resident is necessarily required to deduct TAS then the consequence would be that the Department would be entitled to appropriate the moneys deposited by the payer even

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

226 as per calculation made under section 36(1 )(viia). The entitlement for deduction cannot be restricted to the extent of only provision created in the books subject to the upper limits laid down in Sec.36(1)((viia)(a) given as above. The AO however held that the deduction u/s.36(1)(viia)(a) of the Act cannot be greater than

SHRI RAKESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

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

226/- is income from the contractee business. The AO is directed to recomputed the income and give credit to the aforesaid decision. As the appellant failed to give plausible explanation for incorrect/inaccurate books of account and incomplete audit report furnished along with return of income. which is equivalent of not getting / not furnishing the books of audit report. Hence, assessee