M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

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

section 194J of the Act. Therefore in our considered opinion the investigation and investigation & procedure charges are outside the purview of TDS provisions. 10.1 However the ld. AR before us filed the affidavit stating that the recipient hospitals have already discharged their obligations towards the tax liability by filing the returns of income. The ld. AR also submitted the list

HERIGAGE HEALTH TPA(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT(TDS), CIRCLE -57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

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

section 194J of the Act. Therefore in our considered opinion the investigation and investigation & procedure charges are outside the purview of TDS provisions. 10.1 However the ld. AR before us filed the affidavit stating that the recipient hospitals have already discharged their obligations towards the tax liability by filing the returns of income. The ld. AR also submitted the list

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

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

section 194J of the Act. Therefore in our considered opinion the investigation and investigation & procedure charges are outside the purview of TDS provisions. 10.1 However the ld. AR before us filed the affidavit stating that the recipient hospitals have already discharged their obligations towards the tax liability by filing the returns of income. The ld. AR also submitted the list

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. DEY'S MEDICAL (U.P.) PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2005-06

TDS 2 Dey’s Medical (UP) Pvt. ltd. AY 2005-06 u/s 194C by inappropriately accepting contention of the assessee that such disallowance should be qualified for non deduction u/s 194C. 3. That on the fact and in the circumstances of the case the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition on account of sales promotion expenses. Ld.CIT(A) inappropriately

DCIT,CIRCLE-15(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S L.G.W. LIMITED, NORTH 24 PARGANAS

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Dcit, Circle-15(2), V/S. M/S L.G.W. Ltd., 10, Shantipally, Em Vill. Narayanpur, P.O. Bypass, Aayakar Rajarhat, Gopalpur, 24- Bhawan, Poorva, 6Th Parganas (North), West Floor, R.No.615, Bengal-700136 Kolkata-700 107 [Pan No.Aaacl 4670 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit- अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Dr Shri A.K. Tibrerwal, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2016, Passed In Case No.47/Cit(A)-5/Cir.14(1)/15-16, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S First Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Reversing Assessment Findings Disallowing The Taxpayer’S Commission Payments Made To Foreign Export Agents Amounting To ₹257,60,898/- For Non Deduction Of Tds U/S 40(A)(I) As Follows:- “1. Commission To Foreign Agents - Rs.2,57,60,898/- The Ao Has Added Sum Of Rs.2,57,60,898/- By Holding That The Said Amounts Were Paid To Foreign Agents Without Deduction Of Tds U/S.195. The Addition Has Been Made U/S

57,60,898 made by the Assessing Officer relying on the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, on the ITA No.1786/Kol/2016 A.Y. 2012-13 DCIT Cir-15(2), Kol. Vs. M/s L.G.W. Ltd. Page 3 alleged ground that the Appellant Company failed to deduct TDS

EXIMCORP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

57,310/- and book profit of Rs. 4,42,73,900/- u/s 115JB of the Act. In this year also the assessee was engaged in the business of importing and selling of wood panel products etc. Even in this year, it was noticed that the assessee had debited on account of usance interest and L.C. confirmation charges amounting

EXIMCORP INDIA (P) LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

57,310/- and book profit of Rs. 4,42,73,900/- u/s 115JB of the Act. In this year also the assessee was engaged in the business of importing and selling of wood panel products etc. Even in this year, it was noticed that the assessee had debited on account of usance interest and L.C. confirmation charges amounting

DEBOTTOR TRUST ESTATE OF RAMMOHAN MULLICK,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 43(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

57 of the Act. However it was submitted that the trust is not registered under section 12A of the Act and consequently there is no question for claiming the exemption under section 11 of the Act. Therefore the observation of the AO for reopening the case u/s 147 of the Act that the assessee has claimed exemption

SITANGSHU DAS,SOUTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. ITO, WARD - 26(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

57 Nos of Workers throughout the\nwhole year on an average of Rs.2,224/- per month which was given to the\nLabour Family Head [15 Nos. as per Assessment Order) not to be treated as\nLabour Contractor Payment and does not cover Under the provision 194C of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961, he is not liable to deduct TDS

JANARDAN NIRMAN PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT,(TDS), RANGE-57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1822/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Janardan Nirman Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan [Pan: Aaccj 0540 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 18.10.2011, passed by Learned JCIT(TDS), Range- 57, Kolkata. 2. For that

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. TM INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

TDS provisions of the Act could not have been applied in any manner. On such facts of the matter, I find the A.O was on a wrong notion in applying the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) in making the impugned disallowance. In view of the foregoing, the A.O is directed to delete the impugned disallowance/addition of Rs.1,57

SUBHAG MERCANTILE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS WD-59(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2004-05

section 201(1A) of the Act only. 6. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the observation of AO that assessee failed to deduct TDS on interest payment to different companies is based on wrong-assumption of facts. As such, assessee has deducted TDS on the interest expense

MC NALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

57,386/-. Accordingly, total disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the 3 ITA Nos.2776/A/2011,1575/K/2011 & 927/K/.2013 Mc Nally Sayaji Engg. Ltd.., AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 Rules worked out to Rs. 2,73,558/-. The ld CIT(A) sustained the disallowance made by the ld AO. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before

DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MCNALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

57,386/-. Accordingly, total disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the 3 ITA Nos.2776/A/2011,1575/K/2011 & 927/K/.2013 Mc Nally Sayaji Engg. Ltd.., AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 Rules worked out to Rs. 2,73,558/-. The ld CIT(A) sustained the disallowance made by the ld AO. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before

INDO NABIN PROJECTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purpose as stated above

Bench: : Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

57,050/-under section 143 (3) of the act wherein the assessing officer made several additions. 4. The appellant assessee raised the ground no-1as under: on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT-A – 4 Kolkata was wrong in conforming the disallowance of the commission of Rs.2,58,315.000 disregarding

DEBOTTOR TRUST ESTATE OF RAMMOHAN MULLICK,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-43(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

section 57 of the Act. However, on perusal of income tax return we find the fact is that the assessee is not registered u/s 12A of the Act and no exemption u/s 11 of the Act was claimed. Similarly, we find that no expense against the income of other sources was claimed by the assessee and consequently no question

ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIR.-1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. MAHABIR PRASAD GUPTA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 57(3) of the Act is applicable only for expenses incurred to earn the income, therefore, the alleged interest expenditure having no nexus with the interest earned during the year cannot be allowed as deduction. 9. Per contra ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the paper book containing various details including cash flow statement

MINERAL ORIENTAL LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee on this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, J.M. &Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 14.11.2013. 2. The facts of the case are stated in brief. The assessee is a limited company and engaged in the business of Mining, Trading & Processing of Marbles and Granites. The assessee company has filed its return of income on 08-08-2011, declaring total income