KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,NETHERLANDS vs. DCIT (IT), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.437 To 441/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2012-13 M/S. Koninklijke Philips N.V Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Deloitte Touché Income Tax (It), Circle-1(2), Tohmatsu India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata. Bengal Intelligent Park, Vs. Building Alpha, Block Ep & Gp, 1St Floor, Sector V, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Kolkata-700 091. (Pan: Aacck0806B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Ketan Ved, Ca Respondent By : Shri G. H. Sema, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 22.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: All These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-22 Vide Order Nos. Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035034204(1) Dated 23.08.2021 For A.Y. 2008-09, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162630(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2009-10, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162589(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2010-11, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162672(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2011-12 & Itba/Apl/S/250/2021- 22/1035162702(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2012-13 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Acit(It), C-1(2), Kolkata Dated 23.07.2019, 13.11.2019 (For Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10) & 07.02.2020 (For Ays 2010-11 To 2012-13). Koninklijke Philips N.V, A.Ys: 2008-09 To 2012-13 2. Shri Ketan Ved, Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri G. H. Sema, Addl. Cit Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

TDS ought to be done by the AO. He pointed out to the substantial question of law dealt with by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case, which is reproduced as under: “(i) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that interest under section 244A

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,NETHERLANDS vs. DCIT (IT), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.437 To 441/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2012-13 M/S. Koninklijke Philips N.V Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Deloitte Touché Income Tax (It), Circle-1(2), Tohmatsu India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata. Bengal Intelligent Park, Vs. Building Alpha, Block Ep & Gp, 1St Floor, Sector V, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Kolkata-700 091. (Pan: Aacck0806B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Ketan Ved, Ca Respondent By : Shri G. H. Sema, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 22.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: All These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-22 Vide Order Nos. Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035034204(1) Dated 23.08.2021 For A.Y. 2008-09, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162630(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2009-10, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162589(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2010-11, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162672(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2011-12 & Itba/Apl/S/250/2021- 22/1035162702(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2012-13 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Acit(It), C-1(2), Kolkata Dated 23.07.2019, 13.11.2019 (For Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10) & 07.02.2020 (For Ays 2010-11 To 2012-13). Koninklijke Philips N.V, A.Ys: 2008-09 To 2012-13 2. Shri Ketan Ved, Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri G. H. Sema, Addl. Cit Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

TDS ought to be done by the AO. He pointed out to the substantial question of law dealt with by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case, which is reproduced as under: “(i) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that interest under section 244A

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,NETHERLANDS vs. DCIT (IT), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.437 To 441/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2012-13 M/S. Koninklijke Philips N.V Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Deloitte Touché Income Tax (It), Circle-1(2), Tohmatsu India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata. Bengal Intelligent Park, Vs. Building Alpha, Block Ep & Gp, 1St Floor, Sector V, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Kolkata-700 091. (Pan: Aacck0806B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Ketan Ved, Ca Respondent By : Shri G. H. Sema, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 22.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: All These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-22 Vide Order Nos. Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035034204(1) Dated 23.08.2021 For A.Y. 2008-09, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162630(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2009-10, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162589(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2010-11, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162672(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2011-12 & Itba/Apl/S/250/2021- 22/1035162702(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2012-13 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Acit(It), C-1(2), Kolkata Dated 23.07.2019, 13.11.2019 (For Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10) & 07.02.2020 (For Ays 2010-11 To 2012-13). Koninklijke Philips N.V, A.Ys: 2008-09 To 2012-13 2. Shri Ketan Ved, Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri G. H. Sema, Addl. Cit Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

TDS ought to be done by the AO. He pointed out to the substantial question of law dealt with by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case, which is reproduced as under: “(i) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that interest under section 244A

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,NETHERLANDS vs. DCIT (IT), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.437 To 441/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2012-13 M/S. Koninklijke Philips N.V Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Deloitte Touché Income Tax (It), Circle-1(2), Tohmatsu India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata. Bengal Intelligent Park, Vs. Building Alpha, Block Ep & Gp, 1St Floor, Sector V, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Kolkata-700 091. (Pan: Aacck0806B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Ketan Ved, Ca Respondent By : Shri G. H. Sema, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 22.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: All These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-22 Vide Order Nos. Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035034204(1) Dated 23.08.2021 For A.Y. 2008-09, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162630(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2009-10, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162589(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2010-11, Itba/Apl/S/250/2021-22/1035162672(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2011-12 & Itba/Apl/S/250/2021- 22/1035162702(1) Dated 28.08.2021 For Ay 2012-13 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Acit(It), C-1(2), Kolkata Dated 23.07.2019, 13.11.2019 (For Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10) & 07.02.2020 (For Ays 2010-11 To 2012-13). Koninklijke Philips N.V, A.Ys: 2008-09 To 2012-13 2. Shri Ketan Ved, Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri G. H. Sema, Addl. Cit Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

TDS ought to be done by the AO. He pointed out to the substantial question of law dealt with by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case, which is reproduced as under: “(i) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that interest under section 244A

THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

2 I.T.A. No. 1427/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 1990-91 The Peerless Gen. Fin. & Inv. Co. Ltd he provided a revised computation of interest u/s 244A of the Act and refund payable to the assessee as per the ld. Assessing Officer’s order. 2.1. The ld. D/R, on the other hand, relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). He submitted

I.T.C LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. C.I.T KOL - III,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasusdevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2007-08

TDS deposited to and refunded by revenue subsequently. The Supreme Court has clearly held that: ‘ …Interest payment is a statutory obligation and non-discretionary in nature to the assessee. In tune with the aforesaid general principle, Section 244A is drafted and enacted. The language employed in Section 244A of the Act is clear and plain. It grants substantive right

M/S ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-III, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasusdevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2007-08

TDS deposited to and refunded by revenue subsequently. The Supreme Court has clearly held that: ‘ …Interest payment is a statutory obligation and non-discretionary in nature to the assessee. In tune with the aforesaid general principle, Section 244A is drafted and enacted. The language employed in Section 244A of the Act is clear and plain. It grants substantive right

SREI INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-11(1), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.1157/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aaacs1425L) Vs. Acit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata ……. Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Sm. Lata Goyal, Aca Appeared For Appellant Shri S. Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent . Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 29.04.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 05.09.2023 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order U/S. 154 R,W,S, 143(3) Of The Act By Acit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata Dated 12.07.2022. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), [Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Cit(A)] Was Not Justified & Grossly Erred In Not Granting The Interest U/S. 244A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act').

2) and the reference was given to the TPO on 18.10.2019 and finally assessment order was framed on 29.05.2021 and in the computation sheet attached with the assessment order amount payable to assessee was only Rs.3,31,49,723/-. No interest u/s. 244A of the Act was given because the TDS was less than 10% of the total tax liability

JCIT (IN SITU), CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.750/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 1992-93) Jcit (In Situ), Circle-1(1), Vs The Peerless General Finance Kolkata & Investment Company Limited Peerless Bhawan, 3, Esplanade East, Kolkata-700069 Pan No. :Aabct 3043 L (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sushanta Saha, Addl. Cit निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 26.09.2017, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-22, Kolkata, For The Assessment Year 1992-93. 2. At The Outset, We Observe That There Is A Delay Of 39 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Revenue For Which The Condonation Petition Has Been Filed. After Perusing The Contents Of Condonation Petition, We Are Inclined To Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Adjudication. 3. The Only Issue Raised By The Revenue In The Various Grounds Of Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Holding That The Assessee Is Entitled To Interest On Unpaid Interest Whereas There Is No Provisions As Per The Income Tax Act To Charge The Interest On Unpaid Interest On The Assessee As Well As Nowhere The Powers Give Rights To The Assessing Officer To Give Interest On Unpaid Interest To The Assessee.

2. Thus when the full amount of refund due is not paid but a part amount is paid, the assessee is entitled to interest u/s. 244A on the balance outstanding amount which partake the character of 'amount due' under the provisions of section 244A of the IT Act. The above method of calculation of interest u/s. 244A

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD., ,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT (TDS), CIRCLE - 4, DURGAPUR , DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 244A of the Act on the refund, if any, due to the assessee for excess deposit of TDS. Since this issue raised by the assessee is purely a legal issue and all the facts relevant to decide the said issue are available on record, the additional ground raised by the assessee is admitted by us keeping in view

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD., ,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT (TDS), CIRCLE - 4, DURGAPUR , DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 244A of the Act on the refund, if any, due to the assessee for excess deposit of TDS. Since this issue raised by the assessee is purely a legal issue and all the facts relevant to decide the said issue are available on record, the additional ground raised by the assessee is admitted by us keeping in view

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD., ,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT (TDS), CIRCLE - 4, DURGAPUR , DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 244A of the Act on the refund, if any, due to the assessee for excess deposit of TDS. Since this issue raised by the assessee is purely a legal issue and all the facts relevant to decide the said issue are available on record, the additional ground raised by the assessee is admitted by us keeping in view

TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2016-17

TDS under section 194J of the Act. Ground 8.5: That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO/CIT have erred in routinely applying section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, without satisfaction of all the requirements stipulated under second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Appellant has not been held

TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2016-17

TDS under section 194J of the Act. Ground 8.5: That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO/CIT have erred in routinely applying section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, without satisfaction of all the requirements stipulated under second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Appellant has not been held

TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2016-17

TDS under section 194J of the Act. Ground 8.5: That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO/CIT have erred in routinely applying section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, without satisfaction of all the requirements stipulated under second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Appellant has not been held

PAHARPUR COOLING TOWERS LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.408/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd………...........………………....Appellant 8/1/B, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata – 700027. [Pan: Aabcp8017C] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata.…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nitesh Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sailen Samaddar, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 06, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 04, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.02.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 20, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By Two Days. A Separate Application For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed. Considering The Shortness Of Delay, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned.

section 244A(1) of the Act. 6.2 We have given our careful thought to the plea raised by both the ld. representatives of the parties. In our view, the advance tax paid, TDS or TCS deducted or even the MAT credit are in the shape of credits of the taxes already paid, which are given set off or credit after

M/S. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

section 244A(1) of the Act. To sum up, we hold that in the present case of the assessee, the beneficial provision restricting the scope of taxability of interest in terms of Article 12(3)(a) of the India-Italy DTAA namely, non-taxability of interest on income tax refund by virtue of it being a ‘debt claim’ from

M/S PHILIPS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

244A of the Act. 13. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) 13.1. The Learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271 (1)(c) of the Act. 14. Dividend Distribution Tax 14.1 The learned AO erred in wrongly computing additional tax and interest payable on distributed profit of Rs. 4,44,320 without assigning any reason thereto. The appellant submits

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PHILIPS INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

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

244A of the Act. 13. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) 13.1. The Learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271 (1)(c) of the Act. 14. Dividend Distribution Tax 14.1 The learned AO erred in wrongly computing additional tax and interest payable on distributed profit of Rs. 4,44,320 without assigning any reason thereto. The appellant submits