OUTOTEC (FINLAND) OY (NOW MERGED WITH "METSO MINERALS OY" AND THE MERGED ENTITY HAS BEEN RENAMED TO METSO OUTOTEC FINLAND OY),HARYANA vs. ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result,both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

G. HukughaSema, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 19.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These two appeals filed by the assessee are against the order of Ld. DCIT, (International Taxation), Circle-2(1), Kolkata vide Order No. ITBA/AST/M/143(3)/2021-22/1039165651(1) and ITBA/AST/M/144C/2021-22/1036056564(1) dated 28.01.2022 30.09.2021 respectively, passed against the order

BINOD KUMAR MAHATO ,BURDWAN vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - BURDWAN , BURDWAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

271A of the Act. He further records in his order that the assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act. assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act. 2.1. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. CIT(A), Burdwan, vide Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. CIT(A), Burdwan, vide Aggrieved, the assessee

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

TDS of Rs.11,761/- was deducted as corroborated by the bank certificate annexed at page 16 of paper book. We also find that same was duly appearing in Form 26AS. Therefore, we do not find any substance in the addition made by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the ld CIT(A). P a g e 2

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

TDS of Rs.11,761/- was deducted as corroborated by the bank certificate annexed at page 16 of paper book. We also find that same was duly appearing in Form 26AS. Therefore, we do not find any substance in the addition made by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the ld CIT(A). P a g e 2

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

TDS of Rs.11,761/- was deducted as corroborated by the bank certificate annexed at page 16 of paper book. We also find that same was duly appearing in Form 26AS. Therefore, we do not find any substance in the addition made by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the ld CIT(A). P a g e 2

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

TDS of Rs.11,761/- was deducted as corroborated by the bank certificate annexed at page 16 of paper book. We also find that same was duly appearing in Form 26AS. Therefore, we do not find any substance in the addition made by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the ld CIT(A). P a g e 2