NITSON & AMITSU PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

TDS. [Annexure 'J'] (xi) Rates & Taxes. [Annexure 'K'] (xii) Details of telephone charges. [Annexure 'L'] (xiii) Car running expenses. [Annexure 'M']” 11.1. The assessee has given detailed replies during the course of assessment proceedings to the queries of the ld. AO. Before the Pr. CIT the assessee had made elaborate submissions. After considering the same, the Pr. CIT rejected

SENBO ENGINEERING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2007-08 Senbo Engineering Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 87, Lenin Sarani, Vs Income Tax, Circle-11, Kolkata - 700013 Kolkata - 700013 (Pan: Aadcs6138B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS had been for Rs. 1,65,08,496 and advance Taxes of Rs. 20,50,000 had been paid, a sum of Rs.1,19,70,306 was shown as Refundable to the appellant, in the Return. All the Infrastructure projects had to be carried out on the basis of the agreements/contracts entered into with the Statutory Bodies. In each

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

275(SC) the Supreme court held that Section 2(22) deals with various types of cases and creates a fiction by which certain receipts or parts thereof are treated as dividend for the purpose of levy of Income-tax . In CIT v. Martin Burn Ltd., (1982)136 ITR 805(cal) the Calcutta High court held that Under section

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

275(SC) the Supreme court held that Section 2(22) deals with various types of cases and creates a fiction by which certain receipts or parts thereof are treated as dividend for the purpose of levy of Income-tax . In CIT v. Martin Burn Ltd., (1982)136 ITR 805(cal) the Calcutta High court held that Under section

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

275(SC) the Supreme court held that Section 2(22) deals with various types of cases and creates a fiction by which certain receipts or parts thereof are treated as dividend for the purpose of levy of Income-tax . In CIT v. Martin Burn Ltd., (1982)136 ITR 805(cal) the Calcutta High court held that Under section

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

275(SC) the Supreme court held that Section 2(22) deals with various types of cases and creates a fiction by which certain receipts or parts thereof are treated as dividend for the purpose of levy of Income-tax . In CIT v. Martin Burn Ltd., (1982)136 ITR 805(cal) the Calcutta High court held that Under section

M/S. DEEPAK INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2317/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11)

section 80IC of the Act. During scrutiny proceedings ld AO observed that the assessee company has claimed deduction of Rs.19,64,57,382/- u/s 80IC of the Act, in respect of profit from Rudrapur Unit. The assessee company has three units viz. Kolkata Unit, Faridabad Unit and Rudrapur Unit. Before the AO the assessee submitted consolidated account for the whole

ADDL.CIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA vs. OSD COKE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

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

275 ITR 403 (Mad). 4 OSD Coke Pvt. Ltd., AY 2004-05 & 2005-06 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances and the judicial pronouncements, we are of the view that in the present case simply because there was massive repairs and substantial expenditure incurred by assessee on repairs the same cannot be treated as capital in nature

ITO, WARD - 7(2), KOLKATA vs. OSD COKE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

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

275 ITR 403 (Mad). 4 OSD Coke Pvt. Ltd., AY 2004-05 & 2005-06 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances and the judicial pronouncements, we are of the view that in the present case simply because there was massive repairs and substantial expenditure incurred by assessee on repairs the same cannot be treated as capital in nature

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

TDS of Rs. 1,50,000/- was deducted and deposited in the account of Athak Investment Pvt. Ltd. thereby deleing the addition of Rs. 27,00,000/- which was stated by the AO to be on account of interest Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. paid in cash without bring any material on record to corroborate the same. Therefore

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

TDS of Rs. 1,50,000/- was deducted and deposited in the account of Athak Investment Pvt. Ltd. thereby deleing the addition of Rs. 27,00,000/- which was stated by the AO to be on account of interest Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. paid in cash without bring any material on record to corroborate the same. Therefore

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

TDS of Rs. 1,50,000/- was deducted and deposited in the account of Athak Investment Pvt. Ltd. thereby deleing the addition of Rs. 27,00,000/- which was stated by the AO to be on account of interest Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. paid in cash without bring any material on record to corroborate the same. Therefore

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

TDS of Rs. 1,50,000/- was deducted and deposited in the account of Athak Investment Pvt. Ltd. thereby deleing the addition of Rs. 27,00,000/- which was stated by the AO to be on account of interest Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. paid in cash without bring any material on record to corroborate the same. Therefore

THE EXECUTOR TO THE ESTATE OF SUKHENDU PRASAD CHOUDHURY,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 29, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

275 (Kerala) it has been held as under: “The Scope of Appeal & The Powers of Appellate Authority ■ Section 251 spells out the powers of the Commissioner (Appeals). [Para 29] ■ The provision empowers the appellate authority, in an appeal against an order of assessment, to confirm, reduce, enhance, or annul the assessment. Under the amended section 251, the Appellate Commissioner

SHRI SUBHASH BOSE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-49, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

section as provided by Explanation below to sec. 69C of the Act and thus, made an addition of Rs.99,35,275/- to the total income. Aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is before us. 4. We have heard rival submissions and carefully perused the material available on record. The AO noted that

DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CHLORIDE POWER SYSTEMS & SOLUTIONS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Cir-2(1), Kolkata Vs M/S. Chloride Power Systems & Solutions Ltd. Pan: Aabcc1825B Deptt (Respondent)

275 of the said report that "It has to be observed here that the expression 'wholly and exclusively' used in section 10(2)(xv) of the Act [of the 1922 Act, corresponding to section 37(1) of the 1961 Act] does not mean M/s.Chloride Power Systems & Solutions Ltd. 4 'necessarily'. Ordinarily, it is for the assessee to decide whether

AMAR NATH SHROFF,KOLKATA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA

In the result ITA Nos.1797 to 1800/Kol/2009 are allowed while ITA Nos

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

TDS of Rs.l,63,242/-, self assessment tax u/s.140A of Rs.5,27,991/- and regular tax of Rs. 2,01,275/-paid on 22-07-2008. The appellant is still due to pay tax and interest of Rs.53,445/- . For Assessment Year 2005-06, the appellant on a total income of Rs. 84,75,7201- was liable

DCIT, C.C. I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMARNATH SHROFF, KOLKATA

In the result ITA Nos.1797 to 1800/Kol/2009 are allowed while ITA Nos

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

TDS of Rs.l,63,242/-, self assessment tax u/s.140A of Rs.5,27,991/- and regular tax of Rs. 2,01,275/-paid on 22-07-2008. The appellant is still due to pay tax and interest of Rs.53,445/- . For Assessment Year 2005-06, the appellant on a total income of Rs. 84,75,7201- was liable