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.

254 of the Act determining total income at Rs.25,57,77,930/- and refund including interest u/s. 244A(1) payable to the assessee at Rs.25,22,16,230/-. From the order giving effect to the appellate order of ITAT, assessee raised the issue before Ld. CIT(A) in not granting of interest u/s. 244A(1A) of the Act and deduction

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.

254 of the Act determining total income at Rs.25,57,77,930/- and refund including interest u/s. 244A(1) payable to the assessee at Rs.25,22,16,230/-. From the order giving effect to the appellate order of ITAT, assessee raised the issue before Ld. CIT(A) in not granting of interest u/s. 244A(1A) of the Act and deduction

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.

254 of the Act determining total income at Rs.25,57,77,930/- and refund including interest u/s. 244A(1) payable to the assessee at Rs.25,22,16,230/-. From the order giving effect to the appellate order of ITAT, assessee raised the issue before Ld. CIT(A) in not granting of interest u/s. 244A(1A) of the Act and deduction

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.

254 of the Act determining total income at Rs.25,57,77,930/- and refund including interest u/s. 244A(1) payable to the assessee at Rs.25,22,16,230/-. From the order giving effect to the appellate order of ITAT, assessee raised the issue before Ld. CIT(A) in not granting of interest u/s. 244A(1A) of the Act and deduction

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').

TDS was less than 10% of the total tax liability. Thereafter, on 06.06.2022, assessee moved a rectification application and one of the point of its application was that the assessee is entitled to substantial MAT credit brought forward from earlier years. The details of such MAT credit of Rs.33,08,57,877/- is mentioned below: 9. On going through

M/S HOOGHLY MILLS PROJECTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: : Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

254 is received by the 98[Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section 264 is passed by the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner on or after the 1st day of April, 2005 but before the 1st day of April, 2011, the provisions of this

M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (I) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, R-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

TDS under section 194 on the reimbursement of salary of seconded I.T.A. Nos. 1671/KOL./2008 & 1024/KOL/2009 Assessment years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 & I.T.A. Nos. 1699/KOL/2008 & 973/KOL/2009 Assessment years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 Page 10 of 34 employees. Keeping in view these decisions of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Nagase India Pvt. Limited (supra) and Temasek

M/S. BANDHAN BANK LTD. (ERSTWHILE GHOSH FINANCE LTD),KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-5(1), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2016-17

TDS could be given if the proof was asked for by the Assessing Officer in terms of section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but not in case where the assessee had placed the proof on record without filing a revised return under section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thus, documents placed on record with

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited\n[116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither\nbinding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the\ndecisions in the following cases:\n(a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT\n257 (SC)]\n(b) Vikrant Tyres vs First

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited [116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither binding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the decisions in the following cases: (a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT 257 (SC)] (b) Vikrant Tyres vs First

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited\n[116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither\nbinding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the\ndecisions in the following cases:\n(a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT\n257 (SC)]\n(b) Vikrant Tyres vs First

COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited\n[116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither\nbinding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the\ndecisions in the following cases:\n(a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT\n257 (SC)]\n(b) Vikrant Tyres vs First

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited\n[116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither\nbinding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the\ndecisions in the following cases:\n(a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT\n257 (SC)]\n(b) Vikrant Tyres vs First

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited\n[116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither\nbinding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the\ndecisions in the following cases:\n(a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT\n257 (SC)]\n(b) Vikrant Tyres vs First

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

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

section 40(a)(ia). Now the assessee deducted the TDS and deposited the amount in bank in the year under consideration. Hence the deduction was claimed. However, AO observed that no evidence in respect of payment of TDS was furnished and accordingly AO disallowed the claim of assessee. 19. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) whereas

DCIT, CIRCLE-7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EAST INDIA BUSINESS CENTRE (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

TDS and allow the credit if found in order ITA No.1882/Kol/2014 M/s. East India Business Centre (P)Ltd A.Y.2008-09 4 and if the underlying income has been offered to tax in the AY 2008-09. Ground Nos 1 & 2 are, therefore, disposed of accordingly. 8. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the revenue has preferred the present appeal

RAKSHIT CHEMICALS,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD - 47(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2011-12

254 (Bom) that decreetal amount assumes the character of judgment debt does not invite TDS deduction is rendered infructuous. 3. Next comes the assessee’s second substantive grievance seeking to delete partner’s remuneration of ₹1,80,000/- paid to Smt. Srabani Rakshit as a working partner. It transpires during the course of hearing that the departmental authorities have

TCG FACILITIES MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1631/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11)

254/- for the month of April, 2010. This amount of maintenance charges received by the assessee company has been included in the total income of the assessee company for the FY 2010-11 and has been assessed as such in the assessment year 2011- 12.” We note that Global e-Business Operation Pvt. Ltd. deducted TDS in the month