SHANKAR ROADWAYS,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CEN. CIR. 1(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS of Rs.2,08,282/- only in respect of the transportation charges paid amount of Rs.20,82,820/- out of total transportation charges paid of Rs.21,47,21,520/-. Ld. Pr. CIT observed that as per provision of Section

SANOWAR ALI KHAN ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 25(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 282 of the Act and the assessee came to know that the assessment was completed ex-parte only on the basis of the order passed u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act dated 30.06.2025, and also that the ex parte order was passed u/s 250 of the Act by the Ld. CIT(A) relating to the quantum matter

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 u/s 194J of the Act. 4.18. As far as the applicability of provisions of section 194C are concerned, we hold that the provisions of section 194C of the Act would become applicable only where some work (works contract) is being carried out and there is some human intervention involved in the carriage of such work. The term ‘work

M/S. ASHIM KUMAR CHATTERJEE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-22, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.752/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Ashim Kumar Chatterjee......................................…..............….……….Appellant 169B, Raja Dinendra Street, Manicktala, Kolkata-700004. [Pan: Abypc5107D] Vs. Dcit, Circle-22, Kolkata.…..…....................……........……............…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Jhajharia, Fca / Sujoy Sen, Ar/Pritee Bubna, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 29, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 13, 2022 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.02.2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata [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:

282 (Kol.) and Ld. CIT (Appeals) had erred in not following the same although the said case was brought to his notice in appeal proceedings. (6) For that under similar fact Hon’ble ITAT Kolkata in the case of Appellate Assessee himself had allowed the assessee’s appeal in ITA No.1023/Kol/2016 for assessment year 2010-11. (7) For that

ITO, WARD-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NIRA FIRM DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Waseem Ahmed & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Vs M/S. Nira Firm Developers Pvt.Ltd., Ito, Ward-3(3), 261, 276-277/6, G.T.Road (N), Kolkata. Howrah-711106. Pan-Aaccn4245Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. A.Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit Respondent By Sh. A.Kochar, Adv. Date Of Hearing 01.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 18.07.2018

282/-. Balance amount of Rs.13,32,629/- is due from the customs. Out of the said balance of Rs.90,000/- was received during the FY 2006-07 & Rs.12,57,328/- during FY 2008-09. Further, it was stated the said advance was charged in Revenue’s account in subsequent years. AO found the submissions of the assessee not acceptable

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

ITO, WD-40(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S DAYAL ROADLINES, HOWRAH

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

TDS u/s40(a)(ia), read with section 194C. The Explanation III to section 194C was applicable to the assessment year-in-question. However, it would not apply to the facts of the instant case. This was so because the provisions of section 194C are applicable to payments for carrying out any work in pursuance of a contract. In the case

M/S ASHIM KUMAR CHATTERJEE,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-WD-54(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11

section 194J of the Act. It was also observed that the accounts of the assessee were also subject to audit u/s 44AB of the Act in the immediate preceding Assessment Year. On question by AO for the non-deduction of tax, the assessee submitted that the accountant has made a mistake for non-deduction of TDS inadvertently and expressed

ITO, WARD - 3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CALCUTTA AHMEDABAD CARRIERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue, is dismissed

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

282 ITR 3) the provisions of section 194C are not attracted. 18. It is the explanation of the appellant right from original assessment proceedings that the payments were made to the truck operators on the basis of each trip to different destination without entering into contract and truck operators were hired from common places or stands as and when

RAM AZAD PAL,DURGAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DURGAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Am Income Tax Officer, Ram Azad Pal Ward 2(4), Ranchi Colony, Benachity, Aaykar Bhavan, City Centre, Faridpur, Durgapur, Pin-713213, Vs. Durgapur, Pin-713216, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aoypp0987E Assessee By : Shri Vishal Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nicholas Murmu, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

282/- from various parties on which TDS was made u/s 194 & u/s 194C of the Act. On the basis of this information the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 15.04.2021. Later on, as per ruling given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S DUTSAN G. ENGINEERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2006-07 Ito Ward-10(1) M/S Dutsan G. Engineers बनाम Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Pvt. Ltd., Metro Point, 26, / V/S. Floor, Room No. 78, N.S.C. Bose Road, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700 040 Kolkta-700 069 [Pan No.Aabcd 7854 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

TDS, in the instant case, does not apply. In this connection, we are relying in the judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Limited 282 ITR 3 (Mad). The relevant extract of the order is reproduced below. “Under s. 194C, the tax is to be deducted when a contract was entered

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA vs. TCG URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

TDS written off' of Rs. 73,143/­, 'Travelling & Conveyance' of Rs.13,33,954/­ and 'Personal expenses' of Rs.56,000/­. 6. Having carefully considered the matter, I find that the Ld. A.O was unjustified in taking a view that the business of the assessee had not commenced, when he himself has recorded about the agreement entered by the appellant with

MAITHAN CERAMIC LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA

TDS Whether Squared up Maximum Outstanding Amount Ashiana Properties Pvt Ltd 30.06.2010 5,000,000 Chq No 10,675,616 5,000,00 1.R.N.Mkukherjee, 5th Floor 02.07.2010 5,000,000 Chq 750,685 75,069 10,000,00 Kolkata-700 001 31.03.2011 10,675,61 PA No. AACCA 2514J Harvard Trading Pvt Ltd 22.06.2010 4,000,000 RTGS

M/S TIRUPATI CONSTRUCTION,HOOGHLY vs. CIT-XX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

282/- b. De-watering charges u/s. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s 194C Rs. 1,83,956/- c. Wages & labour charges u/s. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s 194C(3) Rs. 5,13,966/- d. Wages & labour charges u/s. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s 194C(3) Rs.43,94,971/- e. Transportation charges u/s. 40(a)(ia)r.w.s 194C(3) Rs. 1,91,600/- Rs.86

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MCNALLY BHARATI ENGINEERING CO.LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.100/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2006-07

282/- based on the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. (supra) made an alternative submission that the assessee in any event should be allowed a deduction of Rs.13,82,121/- which was the leave encashment actually paid by the assessee from 01.04.2007 till the due date for filing the return

RISTA FISHERIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.C.I.T.-4, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.792/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Rista Fisheries & Infrastructure Vs. Ito, Ward-13(4), Kolkata. Ltd. 282, D.H. Road, West Bengal. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecr6032J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri K. M. Roy, Fca Respondent By : Dr. A. K. Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 4, Kolkata Dated 25.02.2019 Passed Involving Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. We Advert To The Basic Relevant Facts. This Assessee’S Is A Company Developing Infrastructure As Well As Acting As A Commission Agent. It Filed Its Return On 15.02.2015 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.13,202/-. The Assessing Officer Thereafter Framed Regular Assessment In Issue In Its Case Dated 15.11.2016 Determining Its Taxable Income At Rs.4,62,480/- After Making Various Disallowance/Additions.

282, D.H. Road, West Bengal. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAECR6032J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri K. M. Roy, FCA Respondent by : Dr. A. K. Nayak, CIT-DR सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 04/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year

EIH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 153/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Eih Limited [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 110/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Kanchun Kaushal,Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2018 Order Per Bench:

TDS on the following payments :- Advertisement in magazine / website listing Inspection Fees Marketing & Development Charges Recruitment Charges Management Fees Professional / Consultancy Charges In response to the show cause notice issued by the ld AO, the assessee replied vide its submission dated 17.3.2015 that the remittances made for the aforementioned heads of expense, in terms of foreign currency, were

DCIT, CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S EIH LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 153/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Eih Limited [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 110/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Kanchun Kaushal,Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2018 Order Per Bench:

TDS on the following payments :- Advertisement in magazine / website listing Inspection Fees Marketing & Development Charges Recruitment Charges Management Fees Professional / Consultancy Charges In response to the show cause notice issued by the ld AO, the assessee replied vide its submission dated 17.3.2015 that the remittances made for the aforementioned heads of expense, in terms of foreign currency, were