DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PAHARPUR COOLING TOWERS LTD., , KOLKATA

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

32 very basis stood adopted in the latter assessment year 2013-14. Learned departmental representative fails to dispute that the assessee’s impugned provision also confirms AS-7 applicable “accounting for construction contracts” as per various judicial precedents taken note of the CIT(A)’s discussion. Hon'ble apex court’s landmark judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Chainrup

PRIMETALS TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 371 & 372/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 5Th Floor, Tower-C Vs Dlf, It Park-I 08 Majore Arterial Road New Town Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aaecv9657M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate & Pooja Saraf, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1), Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Ao”) Even Dt. 29/04/2022, Passed In Pursuance Of The Directions Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, New Delhi, Dt. 18/02/2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18 & Dt. 04/03/2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18:- “Ground 1:

32. In the subsequent years, it is the use of block of assets, which becomes the yardstick and not the individual asset already acquired in the earlier years, other than the previous year in which it is first brought into use.” (emphasis supplied) 17. Similar view was taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Oswal

PRIMETALS TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 371 & 372/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 5Th Floor, Tower-C Vs Dlf, It Park-I 08 Majore Arterial Road New Town Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aaecv9657M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate & Pooja Saraf, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1), Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Ao”) Even Dt. 29/04/2022, Passed In Pursuance Of The Directions Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, New Delhi, Dt. 18/02/2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18 & Dt. 04/03/2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18:- “Ground 1:

32. In the subsequent years, it is the use of block of assets, which becomes the yardstick and not the individual asset already acquired in the earlier years, other than the previous year in which it is first brought into use.” (emphasis supplied) 17. Similar view was taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Oswal

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

32(1)(iia). Ground no 1 & 2 of the assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2011- 12 are accordingly allowed”. 4. It is also observed that the issue relating to the deletion by the ld. CIT(Appeals) of the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of ERPC charges was also decided by the Tribunal dated October

WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

32(1)(iia). Ground no 1 & 2 of the assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2011- 12 are accordingly allowed”. 4. It is also observed that the issue relating to the deletion by the ld. CIT(Appeals) of the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of ERPC charges was also decided by the Tribunal dated October

SOMA RANI GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-49, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

32. It is worth noticing that in ACIT –vs.- Mr. Mohammed Suhail, Kurnool in ITA No. 1536.Hyd/2014, order dated 13.02.2015, the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal specifically held that the provisions of section 194C(6) are independent of section 194C(7), and just because there is violation of provisions of section 194C(7), disallowance under section

DCIT,CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ALL INDIA TECHNOLOGIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2009-10

32(2) of the Act by the Finance Act, 2001. This issue before their lordships was that of intra head set off only. The CBDT’s Circular No. 14/2001 also made it clear that the restriction in question of eight year(s) for such a carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation stands dispensed with. We conclude in the factual backdrop that

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-4(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA No

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1280 To 1285/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2014-15) Special Land Acquisition Vs. I.T.O, Wd-4(2), Burdwan Officer, Burdwan Aayakar Bhawan, Court Compound, Bda Guest House, Badamtala, Burdwan – 713101. Burdwan – 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Cals 16006 E (Assessee) .. (Respondent)

section 194LA of the Act. After examination of the books (Award Registers), the Assessing Officer worked out the TDS u/s 194LA @10% which is given below: Sl Month Amount of Payments TDS u/s 194LA @10% (a) (b) (c) (d) 1 June,2009 5,29,549 52,955 2 July,2009 6,07,544 60,754 3 Ausust

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-4(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA No

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1280 To 1285/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2014-15) Special Land Acquisition Vs. I.T.O, Wd-4(2), Burdwan Officer, Burdwan Aayakar Bhawan, Court Compound, Bda Guest House, Badamtala, Burdwan – 713101. Burdwan – 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Cals 16006 E (Assessee) .. (Respondent)

section 194LA of the Act. After examination of the books (Award Registers), the Assessing Officer worked out the TDS u/s 194LA @10% which is given below: Sl Month Amount of Payments TDS u/s 194LA @10% (a) (b) (c) (d) 1 June,2009 5,29,549 52,955 2 July,2009 6,07,544 60,754 3 Ausust

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-4(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA No

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1280 To 1285/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2014-15) Special Land Acquisition Vs. I.T.O, Wd-4(2), Burdwan Officer, Burdwan Aayakar Bhawan, Court Compound, Bda Guest House, Badamtala, Burdwan – 713101. Burdwan – 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Cals 16006 E (Assessee) .. (Respondent)

section 194LA of the Act. After examination of the books (Award Registers), the Assessing Officer worked out the TDS u/s 194LA @10% which is given below: Sl Month Amount of Payments TDS u/s 194LA @10% (a) (b) (c) (d) 1 June,2009 5,29,549 52,955 2 July,2009 6,07,544 60,754 3 Ausust

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-4(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA No

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1280 To 1285/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2014-15) Special Land Acquisition Vs. I.T.O, Wd-4(2), Burdwan Officer, Burdwan Aayakar Bhawan, Court Compound, Bda Guest House, Badamtala, Burdwan – 713101. Burdwan – 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Cals 16006 E (Assessee) .. (Respondent)

section 194LA of the Act. After examination of the books (Award Registers), the Assessing Officer worked out the TDS u/s 194LA @10% which is given below: Sl Month Amount of Payments TDS u/s 194LA @10% (a) (b) (c) (d) 1 June,2009 5,29,549 52,955 2 July,2009 6,07,544 60,754 3 Ausust

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-4(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA No

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1280 To 1285/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2014-15) Special Land Acquisition Vs. I.T.O, Wd-4(2), Burdwan Officer, Burdwan Aayakar Bhawan, Court Compound, Bda Guest House, Badamtala, Burdwan – 713101. Burdwan – 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Cals 16006 E (Assessee) .. (Respondent)

section 194LA of the Act. After examination of the books (Award Registers), the Assessing Officer worked out the TDS u/s 194LA @10% which is given below: Sl Month Amount of Payments TDS u/s 194LA @10% (a) (b) (c) (d) 1 June,2009 5,29,549 52,955 2 July,2009 6,07,544 60,754 3 Ausust

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-4(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA No

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1280 To 1285/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2014-15) Special Land Acquisition Vs. I.T.O, Wd-4(2), Burdwan Officer, Burdwan Aayakar Bhawan, Court Compound, Bda Guest House, Badamtala, Burdwan – 713101. Burdwan – 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Cals 16006 E (Assessee) .. (Respondent)

section 194LA of the Act. After examination of the books (Award Registers), the Assessing Officer worked out the TDS u/s 194LA @10% which is given below: Sl Month Amount of Payments TDS u/s 194LA @10% (a) (b) (c) (d) 1 June,2009 5,29,549 52,955 2 July,2009 6,07,544 60,754 3 Ausust

ARSH IRON & STEEL LTD.,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIR-3, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDs was deducted, therefore, the total disallowance of Rs.1,50,98,433/- is completely arbitrary, unjustified and illegal.” 6. Ld. AR for the assessee filed paper book which is running pages from 1 to 169 and submitted that turnover of the assessee in the last year was at ITA No.206-207/Kol/2014 A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11 Arsh Iron & Steel

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

TDS), Range-6,\nSiliguri\n(Respondent)\nVs.\nPAN: AAAAR6191E\nAppearances:\nAssessee represented by\nDepartment represented by\nDate of concluding the hearing\nDate of pronouncing the order\n: N.C. Mondal, AR.\n: Monalisha Pal Mukherjee, JCIT, Sr. DR.\n: 27-November-2025\n: 11-February-2026\nORDER\nPER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:\nThese appeals filed by the assessee are against

I.T.O WD - 7(2),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S WINSOME BREWERIES LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

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

TDS) (2006) 281 ITR 99 (Bom), wherein it is held that supply of printed materials constitutes sale under the sale of Goods Act; and section 194C of the Act is not applicable. In that case it 5 Winsome Breweries Ltd. AY 2009-10 was held that supply of printed packaging labels merely because the printing was done as per requirement/specifications

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

M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

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

TDS Certificates totaling Rs 972 Lacs were fully accounted in the assessee’s books of the relevant year but merely restored the issue for fresh examination by the AO. The order of the Ld. Pr. CIT with reference to issue in clause (a) is therefore set aside. Ground Nos. 3 & 4 are accordingly allowed. 22. In Ground