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]

Section 263 of the Act. In our opinion, once the ld. CIT initiates the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act for specific reasons and these reasons are met by the assessee, then it is incumbent upon the ld. CIT to himself independently deal with the objections and record his own satisfaction to prove that the AO’s order

DCIT, CIR-10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SONODYNE TELEVISION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 330/Kol/2016 Assessment Year :2011-12 Dcit, Circle-10(2), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Sonodyne Television Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aaecs 7096 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 41(1) of the Act. Hence, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 8. Next issue raised by Revenue in ground no. 2 and 3 is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO for Rs. 9,20,543/- on account of undisclosed income. 9. The assessee in the year

MANOJ SINGH,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-51, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.455/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2007-2008) Manoj Singh, Vs. Dcit, Cir-51/Kol, 47, B.T.Road, Uttarapan, Kolkata-700054 Khardah, 24 Pgs (N), Kolkata-700116 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Altps 9206 J .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V.N.Purohit, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arvindam Bhattacharya, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 03/01/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2007-08, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata, In Appeal No.252/Cit(A)-15/14-15/Cir-51/Kol, Dated 23.02.2015, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 29.12.2009. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 31.10.2007 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.8,97,213/- Asessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S.143(3) & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act By Making The Addition On Account Of Remission Of Liability U/S.41(1) At Rs.9,00,690/-. The Assessee Runs A Transport Business Under The Name M/S Ma Kali The Name M/S Ma Kali Automobile. While Making The Assessment

Section 41 (1) of the Act, would not be applicable. Here, according to the books of accounts of the appellant, there were payments to the creditors. There are also evidences in that regard like cash vouchers. Simply on the basis of the fact that the assessee could not immediately furnish the names and addresses of the payees

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

TDS was actually made and paid to the credit of Central\nGovernment.\n5. THAT your petitioner reserves the right to prefer further ground(s) and/or\ndelete/modify ground(s)/arguments, submit documents before the final\ndisposal of this appeal.\"\nWe shall first take up the appeal in ITA No. 974/KOL/2024 for\nadjudication.\n3. Brief facts of the case are that

DDIT(IT)-1(1)KOL, KOLKATA vs. M/S JOY PARTNERSHIP, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 149/Kol/2009 Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ddit(It)-1(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Joy Partnership [Pan: Aadfj 6427 H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS 41,30,719 9 M/s Joy Partnership A.Yr.2005-06 Stores and Spares consumed (Anju Hardware, Mahamaya Trading Agency, Gulati Trading Co., Mine –O-Craft) 14,73,639 Consummables (Agarwal Hardware, Saluja & Brothers, Mine-O-Craft, Jeet Engineering Works) 49,183 Payroll Cost (including Roofbolting labour charges – Kalinga Mining & Civil Construction Pvt Ltd & Indian Payroll Cost

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

41,027/ - by the Bangalore unit and a sum of Rs. 4,348,330/ - paid by The Oberoi, New Delhi had been subjected to TDS. Further to the above, the assessee submitted that the payments under this head was mostly for legal charges for services rendered abroad or towards purchase of designs prepared abroad. In case the above services were

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EIH LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

41,027/ - by the Bangalore unit and a sum of Rs. 4,348,330/ - paid by The Oberoi, New Delhi had been subjected to TDS. Further to the above, the assessee submitted that the payments under this head was mostly for legal charges for services rendered abroad or towards purchase of designs prepared abroad. In case the above services were

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. JCIT (TDS), RANGE - 6, SILIGURI

TDS was actually made and paid to the credit of Central\nGovernment.\n5. THAT your petitioner reserves the right to prefer further ground(s) and/or\ndelete/modify ground(s)/arguments, submit documents before the final\ndisposal of this appeal.\"\nWe shall first take up the appeal in ITA No. 974/KOL/2024 for\nadjudication.\n3. Brief facts of the case are that

DCIT, CENTRAL -4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJESH AUTO MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

TDS had been deducted out of the interest paid/credited to the creditors, it was held that the\ndepartmental authorities were not justified in making the addition which was directed to be deleted. CITv. Smt.\nP.K. Noorjehan [1990] 11 SCC 198 was applied. The assessee having discharged the initial onus which lay on\nit in terms of section 68 by proving

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS was actually made and paid to the credit of Central Government. 5. THAT your petitioner reserves the right to prefer further ground(s) and/or delete/modify ground(s)/arguments, submit documents before the final disposal of this appeal.” A. We shall first take up the appeal in ITA No. 974/KOL/2024 for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that

M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (I) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, R-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

TDS under section 194 on the reimbursement of salary of seconded I.T.A. Nos. 1671/KOL./2008 & 1024/KOL/2009 Assessment years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 & I.T.A. Nos. 1699/KOL/2008 & 973/KOL/2009 Assessment years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 Page 10 of 34 employees. Keeping in view these decisions of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Nagase India Pvt. Limited (supra) and Temasek

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S VANTAGE ADVERTISING PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

41, rule 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure also it is clear that the appellant shall not except by leave of the court, urge or be heard in support of any ground of objection not set forth in the memorandum of appeal.” On the basis of the above ratio the Hon’ble High Court had held that admittedly

M/S. LA OPALA RG LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1) [FORMERLY JCIT, RANGE-12, KOLKATA ], KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Circle 11(1) M/S La Opala Rg Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 8Th Floor, Premises No.803 & 804 Eco Centre, Em-4, Sector-V, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700091, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacl5569J Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kumar Tulsyan & Deepak Mundhra, Tanmoy Kar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2024

section 41(1) being invoked - Held yes [Para 9] [In favour of appellant] 6.12 In view of the above, the addition carried out by Ld. AO is found to be incorrect and thus being deleted. 6.13 Accordingly, Ground 2 of the appellant is Allowed. Ground 3 6.14 The appellant has incurred selling agency commission to the tune

M/S. SHIMMER TEXTILES PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WD-12(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

TDS of Rs. 41,960/- was deducted and the net credit balance stood at Rs. Page 3 of 6 I.T.A. No.: 773/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Shimmer Textiles Pvt. Ltd. 26,13,757/- and the same was being carried forward year to year. During the course of assessment proceedings for AY 2011-12, in compliance to the order

ACIT, CIR-29, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ANS LEATHER COMPANY, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1071/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit, Circle-29, Kolkata Vs. Ans Leather Company

41,360/-.The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under section 143(2) of the Act. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer sentnotices u/s 133(6) of the Act, to different parties to verify the genuineness ofSundry Creditors. The assessing officer issued the notices to the following parties viz:(1). Raj Deo Ram (2). Md. Akeel Ahmed

ITO, WARD - 3(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BISCO METAL & POWER PVT. LTD., JHARKHAND

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

TDS as per section 194C . (v) Ld. CIT(A) has erred on the facts & circumstances of the case in deleting the addition of Rs.11 ,42,075/- which was made by the AO u/s 41

SUROVI MANSION JEWELLERS PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 12(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasusdevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10 Surovi Mansion V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Ward-12(1), 3, Govt. 195/13B, Rash Behari Place, Avenue, Kolkata-700 Kolkata-700 001 019 [Pan No.Aaics 3050P] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

TDS. However the learned AR submitted this loss does not represent the payment to the KARIGARS in the form of gold but it is actual loss and the deduction for such access loss was also made from the payment of the KARIGARS. Now the question before us is whether such loss represents the payment to the KARIGARS

RAJDEEP PRASAD SHAW,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. ITO, WARD-51(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 41(1) of the IT Act is not applicable. So the addition of Rs.65,153/- is justified. I confirm the addition u/s. 41(1) of the IT Act. ITA No.1114 & 1237/Kol/2012 A.Ys. 08-09 & 06-07 Rajdeep Prasad Shaw v. ITO Wd-51(3) Kol. Page 5 Being aggrieved by this order of Ld. CIT(A) assessee preferred second