SRI MANINDRA MOHAN MAZUMDAR,BURDWAN vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2201/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sri Manindra Mohan Vs. J.C.I.T, Range-1, Asansol Mazumdar Sahana Apartment Mother Teressa 19, Radhangar Road, Burnpur- 713325, Road, Lower Chelidanga, Asansol – Dist- Burdwan. 713304. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aelpm 0074 R (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

TDS credit to the tune of Rs.60,004/- on mobilization advance and not entire contract receipts were received in the relevant Assessment Year. 3. Now, we shall take first grievance of the assessee, which relatesto disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) u/s 14A read with rule 8D to the tune of Rs.3

NARESH ANCHALIA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 32(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

TDS credit was not given. Therefore, we are of the view that the case of the assessee falls in Clause (d) of sub-section 253

KANOI TEA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. P.C.I.T. - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross-objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression “sufficient cause” employed in this Section has also been used identically in sub-Section 3 of Section

COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

253 of the Act contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross-objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression "sufficient cause" employed in this Section has also been used identically in sub- Section

COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

253 of the Act contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross-objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression "sufficient cause" employed in this Section has also been used identically in sub- Section

COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

253 of the Act contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross-objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression "sufficient cause" employed in this Section has also been used identically in sub- Section

ACID, CIRCLE-5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EMAMI REALTY LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross objections of the assessee are\ndismissed

TDS to ensure that there is no leakage of revenue on account of non-deduction of\ntaxes at source u/s 194IC of the Act, on payment of Rs. 57.5 crores to M/s Orbit\nCorporation for the Joka Project when such action has been taken in the interest\nsafeguarding the interest of revenue\n8. Whether in the facts and circumstances

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

In the result, the order passed by the Learned CIT u/s 263 of the Act is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

TDS officer to look into the alleged violations, if any, on the same and the Learned AO cannot resort to make any disallowance of expenditure on that count on an estimated basis. We also draw support from the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron and Engineering Co vs CIT reported in 253

DDIT(IT)-1(1)KOL, KOLKATA vs. M/S JOY PARTNERSHIP, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 149/Kol/2009 Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ddit(It)-1(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Joy Partnership [Pan: Aadfj 6427 H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

253,600 Return Add: Roofbolting labour charges not required to be reflected to be shown in TDS 3,053,003 Return Add: Difference due to exchange fluctuation 5,528,804 Add: Overseas insurance premium of the expartriate employees 1,824,080 Add: Debit to P&L A/c due to grossing up 4,500,717 Add: Visa, passport, travelling etc. charges

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

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

section 40(a)(i) of the Act could not 13 ITA Nos.348-314/K/2011 & CO No.23/K/2011 EIH Limited AY 2006-07 be made applicable in the facts of the instant case. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us. 6.1. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. With regard to the prayer of the Learned

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EIH LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

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

section 40(a)(i) of the Act could not 13 ITA Nos.348-314/K/2011 & CO No.23/K/2011 EIH Limited AY 2006-07 be made applicable in the facts of the instant case. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us. 6.1. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. With regard to the prayer of the Learned

SUNIL AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shris.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Dr.A.L. Saini, Hon’Ble

section 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without passing any specific order for such charging of interest in complete disregard of the judgment dated 6th January, 2012 passed by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Dhunser Tea & Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT in ITA No. 396 of 2005. 10. That the appellant craves leave

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]

section 201 of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source when the assessee failed to furnish the letter from International Taxation Wing of Income Tax Department. 15. After hearing the rival contention and perusing the materials as placed before us ,we find that the assessee has not furnished the details/evidences before the authorities below and has harped

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]

section 201 of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source when the assessee failed to furnish the letter from International Taxation Wing of Income Tax Department. 15. After hearing the rival contention and perusing the materials as placed before us ,we find that the assessee has not furnished the details/evidences before the authorities below and has harped

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]

section 201 of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source when the assessee failed to furnish the letter from International Taxation Wing of Income Tax Department. 15. After hearing the rival contention and perusing the materials as placed before us ,we find that the assessee has not furnished the details/evidences before the authorities below and has harped

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]

section 201 of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source when the assessee failed to furnish the letter from International Taxation Wing of Income Tax Department. 15. After hearing the rival contention and perusing the materials as placed before us ,we find that the assessee has not furnished the details/evidences before the authorities below and has harped

M/S SUDARSHAN PAPER & BOARD PVT.LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 1266/Kol/2016, is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

TDS. There was an agreement also between the assessee company and its agent Sugam Vinimay Pvt. Ltd by which the agent had the right to receive commission and Sugam Vinimay also filed the return showing the commission income. The AO also has not alleged that assessee company and Sugam Vinimay are related to each other or that the payments were

DCIT, CIR-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SUDARSHAN PAPER & BOARD PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 1266/Kol/2016, is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

TDS. There was an agreement also between the assessee company and its agent Sugam Vinimay Pvt. Ltd by which the agent had the right to receive commission and Sugam Vinimay also filed the return showing the commission income. The AO also has not alleged that assessee company and Sugam Vinimay are related to each other or that the payments were