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

TDS statement. 10. It is also observed that section 245 of the Act duly authorises the concerned Income Tax Authority

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG) (P)LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS under section 201(IA) amounting to Rs.1,80,495.00. Another sum was disallowed u/s. 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the I. T. Rules, 1962. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee except for allowing the grounds of appeal in respect of disallowance made

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG)(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS under section 201(IA) amounting to Rs.1,80,495.00. Another sum was disallowed u/s. 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the I. T. Rules, 1962. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee except for allowing the grounds of appeal in respect of disallowance made

M/S DHAMEJA MINING,SIKKIM vs. ITO, WD-2(4), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

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

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

245 ITR 360] It can be seen in the instant case, there is no detailed order and further rejection of SLP does not mean decision of High Court is approved. Further the decision of Hon. High Court of Allahabad is not final as the power to seek review exists. 8. In the decisions reported in CIT v. Crescent Export Syndicate

MC NALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

245 ITR 428 (SC). In response to this, the Learned DR argued that the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its interim order dated 8.5.2009 had held in the concluding paragraph that the assessee shall pay tax as if the provisions of section 43B(f) of the Act is there in the statute and the ld AO should disallow the same

DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MCNALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

245 ITR 428 (SC). In response to this, the Learned DR argued that the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its interim order dated 8.5.2009 had held in the concluding paragraph that the assessee shall pay tax as if the provisions of section 43B(f) of the Act is there in the statute and the ld AO should disallow the same

WELKIN TELECOM INFRA PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rjesh Kumar, Am ]

245/-. 3. Aggrieved by the additions/disallowances made by the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Still not satisfied with the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us by raising the revised ground no.1 which reads as under: “That

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

TDS. 3. That the appellant craves to leave, add, amend or adduce any of the grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings.” I.T.A. Nos.: 2454 & 2455/KOL/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shreyans Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 3. We shall take up ITA No. 2454/KOL/2024 for AY 2011-12 for adjudication first as the lead case. Brief facts

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

TDS. 3. That the appellant craves to leave, add, amend or adduce any of the grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings.” I.T.A. Nos.: 2454 & 2455/KOL/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shreyans Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 3. We shall take up ITA No. 2454/KOL/2024 for AY 2011-12 for adjudication first as the lead case. Brief facts

M/S VODAFONE EAST LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T RANGE - 7,KOL., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

TDS provisions for international roaming charges of Rs.10,64,45,346/- is allowed. 10. Disallowance of Penalty paid to Department of Telecommunications- Rs.5,05,000/- The next issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the sum paid as penalty to Department of Telecommunications (DOT) by the assessee would fall under the Explanation to section

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

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

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

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

TDS of Rs. 45,73,528 and tax paid after original assessment of Rs. 1,71,00,320. The Department contends that the words "any amount" will not include the interest which accrued to the respondent for not refunding Rs. 45,73,528 for 57 months. We see no merit in this argument. The interest component will partake

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

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

TDS was not effected. The AO further 'observed that this liability had not crystallized as on 31.03.2011 and being contingent in nature was not an allowable expenditure u/s 37 of the Act. 1 find the similar issue had been decided by the erstwhile jurisdictional CIT(A) in the appellant's own case for the AY 2009- 10 (supra) wherein

PARAMARTH SADHAK SANGH ,KOLKATA vs. ADIT(E) CIR -2/NOW ITO(EXEM), WARD - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Paramarth Sadhak Sangh……..………………....…………..……………...……..….…….........Appellant P-113, New Raipur Road (E) Kolkata – 700 084 [Pan : Aaatp 4767 F] Vs. Adit (E), Circle-2/ Now I.T.O. (Exem), Ward-14, Kolkata….……………............Respondent

245 ITR 353 (Ker). The scope and ambit of the powers vested with the Assessing Officer for making prima facie adjustments at the time of processing the return under section 143(1)(a) are very limited. The change of status of the assessee from trust to an AOP is not covered in the nature of adjustments mentioned

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

section 195 either. As regards the withdrawal of the CBDT circular holding that the commission payments to non resident agents are not taxable in India, nothing really turns on the circular, as de hors the aforesaid circular, we have adjudicated upon the taxability of the commission agent’s income in India in terms of the provisions of the Income