D.C.I.T CIR - 11,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AT & S INDIA PVT LTD, KARNATAKA

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmed

269 (Del-SB) – Motorola Income. –vs.- DCIT,Non-resident Circle; 94 ITD 91 (Bang.)-Samsusng Electronics Co. Ltd.-vs.- ITO (TDS). 2.3 The ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the orders f the authorities below. He submitted that the assessee has utilized the services being provided by various service provider companies. The assessee made the payments

AT & S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KARNATAKA vs. DCIT-RANGE-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmed

269 (Del-SB) – Motorola Income. –vs.- DCIT,Non-resident Circle; 94 ITD 91 (Bang.)-Samsusng Electronics Co. Ltd.-vs.- ITO (TDS). 2.3 The ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the orders f the authorities below. He submitted that the assessee has utilized the services being provided by various service provider companies. The assessee made the payments

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]

269 (Kolkata Trib) 3.2. In response to this, the ld DR vehemently relied on the orders of the lower authorities and argued that the provisions of Rule 8D are to be mandatorily complied with from Asst Year 2008-09 and onwards. The ld DR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case

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]

269 (Kolkata Trib) 3.2. In response to this, the ld DR vehemently relied on the orders of the lower authorities and argued that the provisions of Rule 8D are to be mandatorily complied with from Asst Year 2008-09 and onwards. The ld DR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case

ITO, WARD - 12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HARSHWARDHAN GEMS P. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue and that of assessee are dismissed

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

269 ITR 429 (Del). In C.I.T. v. Makhani & Tyagi (P) Ltd. this Court has not given its imprimatur to the inaction of the AO in doing nothing further after the issuance of summons under Section 131 of the Income-Tax Act. It did not condone the AO, failing to issue coercive process, and in this manner attempting incorrectly to shift

HARSHWARDHAN GEMS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue and that of assessee are dismissed

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

269 ITR 429 (Del). In C.I.T. v. Makhani & Tyagi (P) Ltd. this Court has not given its imprimatur to the inaction of the AO in doing nothing further after the issuance of summons under Section 131 of the Income-Tax Act. It did not condone the AO, failing to issue coercive process, and in this manner attempting incorrectly to shift

DCIT, CIR-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S THE JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Kolkata........................………..…..........Appellant Vs. M/S. The Jute Corporation Of India Ltd...................................................…………...................Respondent 15N, Hudco Building Nellie Sengupta Sarani Kolkata – 700 087 [Pan : Aabct 8820 B] Appearances By: Shri Biswajit Syam, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri T.P. Singh, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 16Th, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 8Th, 2021 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-, Kz :- This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 5, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 26/08/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’).

section 3 of Schedule on 3 of Schedule-19, the auditor had remarked that “the value of the stock of raw 19, the auditor had remarked that “the value of the stock of raw jute at the close of the year has been arrived at after providing loss/gain due to prolonged storage jute at the close of the year

DCIT, CIRCLE-48, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. 3 GUYS, HOWRAH

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

269/- and the ITA No.1670/Kol/2014 A.Y.2008-09 DCIT, Cir-48 Kol. Vs. M/s 3 Guys Page 8 balance of Rs.4,50,60,116/- is deleted. The ground [original no.d (last sentence)/revised no.5] is thus partly allowed.” The Revenue, being aggrieved, is in appeal before us. 6. Before us Ld. DR submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has granted partly relief

SANDEEP MODI,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

269/- and showed this income (SBI LIC maturity benefit) under the head “Income from Other Sources” to the tune of Rs.3,09,000/-. 6. Thereafter, when the ROI was processed by the CPC it took note of the fact that the assessee has shown only the net income [Rs.13

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

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

269/- and de mat charges at Rs.6,85,115/- under the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules being expenses relatable to earning of exempted income. The assessee has earned total exempt income at Rs.14,96,64,407/- and disallowance was made by invoking the provisions of section 14A read with Rule

DCIT, CIRCLE -8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

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

269/- and de mat charges at Rs.6,85,115/- under the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules being expenses relatable to earning of exempted income. The assessee has earned total exempt income at Rs.14,96,64,407/- and disallowance was made by invoking the provisions of section 14A read with Rule

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

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

269/- and de mat charges at Rs.6,85,115/- under the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules being expenses relatable to earning of exempted income. The assessee has earned total exempt income at Rs.14,96,64,407/- and disallowance was made by invoking the provisions of section 14A read with Rule

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

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

269/- and de mat charges at Rs.6,85,115/- under the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules being expenses relatable to earning of exempted income. The assessee has earned total exempt income at Rs.14,96,64,407/- and disallowance was made by invoking the provisions of section 14A read with Rule

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GOODRICK GROUP LTD., KOLKATA

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

TDS certificate u/s. 195(1) of the Act. We find no merit in the instant argument. The fact remains that there is no material on record indicating the assessee’s payees to have rendered any service in India so as to be assessable in India. Hon'ble ITA No.2086-2088/Kol/2016 AYs 09-10 to 11-12 ACIT

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GOODRICK GROUP LTD., KOLKATA

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

TDS certificate u/s. 195(1) of the Act. We find no merit in the instant argument. The fact remains that there is no material on record indicating the assessee’s payees to have rendered any service in India so as to be assessable in India. Hon'ble ITA No.2086-2088/Kol/2016 AYs 09-10 to 11-12 ACIT

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

269 (iv) On perusal of the aforesaid balance sheet it would be noticed that the cash withdrawal from his bank account has been used for house construction or loans given to others. There is no cash balance. (v) Statement of the Loan creditor was recorded under section 131 of the Act by DDIT(lnv), Raipur, initially on 05.02.2013 wherein

BISHISTA BAGCHI,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.540/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bishista Bagchi..........................………………............................…….…………….....Appellant 3C, Santosh Garden, 8, Ekdalia Road, Ballygunj, Kolkata. [Pan:Ayapb6940J] Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru………….…..…...............……........……...…..……………Respondent Appearances By: Shri Indranil Banerjee, Ar,Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Gautam Mondal, Addl. Cit-Dr,Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing :January 31, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 15, 2022 Hearing Through Video Conferencing Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.10.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act(Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

TDS was effected u/s. 194DA of the Act on the above payment of the maturity proceeds. The moot question here is, whether an insurance policy is a capital asset or not.It is observed that the insurance policy taken by the appellant is in the nature of apension policy wherein a sum assured is given at the end of the maturity

MACNEILL ENGINEERING LTD,DCIT, CIR. 1(1) vs. DCIT, CIR. 1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

269/- to the file of AO for verification as the Ld. CIT(A) has no power to set aside the issue despite all the facts and records available before the Ld. CIT(A). 4 AY: 2013-14 Macneil Engineering Ltd. 7. The facts in brief are that during the assessment proceedings , the AO observed from the reconciliation statement filed