ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS JV, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

801A of the Act, a person being a company has to enter into an agreement with the Government or Government undertakings. Such an agreement is a contract and for the purpose of the agreement a person may be called as a contractor as he entered into a contract. But the word “contractor” is used .to denote a person entering into

ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX MEINHARDT JOINT VENTURE, KOLKATA

In the result, both the above appeals of revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

801A of the Act, a person being a company has to enter into an agreement with the Government or Government undertakings. Such an agreement is a contract and for the purpose of the agreement a person may be called as a contractor as he entered into a contract. But the word “contractor” is used .to denote a person entering into

SIMPLEX KRITA JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Simplex Krita Jv Ito, Ward-33(1), Kolkata Simplex House, 27, Shakespeare Vs Sarani, Kolkata-700017. Pan: Aalas 5699 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal In Ita No. 181/Kol/2023 For A.Y. 2016-17 Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Ld. Cit In Short], Dated 25.01.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

TDS credit of the amounts deducted by the project authority and thereby he held that the assessee is not a developer and is a works contractor. Now we may refer to the consolidated order dt:18-06-2013 of the Coordinate Bench in identical case supra, wherein it considered the order of ITAT Hyderabad in the case of M/s. GVPR

M/S BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL./JOINT/DY./ASSTT. COMMISSIONER/ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

section 801A(4)(i) by observing that there is no condition to transfer the infrastructural facility to the GoAP or Specified Authority without considering the fact that this condition has been deleted by the Finance Act, 2001. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP erred in affirming the action

M/S BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-9(1), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

section 801A(4)(i) by observing that there is no condition to transfer the infrastructural facility to the GoAP or Specified Authority without considering the fact that this condition has been deleted by the Finance Act, 2001. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP erred in affirming the action

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INFRASTRACTURE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INTRASTRACTURE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

ACIT,CIR-12(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX PROJECTS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara& Sri M. Balaganesh] I.T.A. No. 279/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-12(2), Kolkata...……...………………………..…Appellant M/S. Simplex Projects Pvt. Ltd..................................…………….…………….….……………….…......Respondent 12/1, Nellie Sen Gupta Sarani Kolkata – 700 087 [Pan – Aadcs 8598 R] Appearances By: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, A/R,Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit, Sr.Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 12Th,2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 11Th,2018 Order Per S.S. Godara, Jm :- This Revenue’S Appeal For The Assessment Year 2008-09 Arises Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 17, Kolkata (Hereinafter The ‘Cit(A)’) Dated 29/11/2016 Passed In Case No. 581/Cit(A)-12/Kol./Range- 12/2014-15 Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Assessee’S Section 80-Ia Deduction Claim Of Rs.14,22,39,344/- In Assessment Order Dated 28/12/2010 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act’).

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term 'work' to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be 'does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

ITO, WD-33(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2008-09 A.Y 2010-11

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ITA Nos. 289 & 290/Kol/2014 3 M/s.Simplex Somdatt Builders JV ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer

D.C.I.T CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX PROJECTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2005-06 Dcit, Cicle-12(2) V/S. M/S Simplex Projects Ltd., Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, 12/1, Nelli Sengupta 6Th Floor, Chowringhee Sarani, Kolkaata-700087 Square, Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aadcs 8598 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-10-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08-11-2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 20.11.2015. Assessment Was Framed By Ito Ward-12(2), Kolkata U/S 144/147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 27.12.2010 For Assessment Year 2005-06. Shri Saurabh Kumar, Ld. Departmental Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Revenue & Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Ld. Authorized Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “1. On The Fact & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred By Treating The Order Of The Ao As Ultra Vires & Annulling The Order Of The Ao By Overlooking The Fact That Assessee Failed To File Any Objection To The Issuance Of Notice U/S. 148 Of The Act Within The Stipulated Time As Per The Provisions Of The Ct Despite Availing Ample Opportunity By Issuing Notices.

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

DCIT, CIRCLE-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS J.V., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

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

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 1(4)/ KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA

POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT CONTROL PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WD-13(3), KOLKATA, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA

ITO, WARD - 13(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT CONTROL PVT. LTD., , HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA

RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T, RANGE-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed and the Assessee’s appeal in I

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2113/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2150/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2006-07 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2114/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2151/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 760/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 762/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

801A(5) states that the profit & gains from these units to be computed as if such eligible business were the only source of income of the assessee. This means that income from these units shall be credited and all the. cost necessary to run the unit shall be debited. These expenses will include cost directly attributable to these units

DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed and the Assessee’s appeal in I

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2113/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2150/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2006-07 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2114/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2151/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 760/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 762/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

801A(5) states that the profit & gains from these units to be computed as if such eligible business were the only source of income of the assessee. This means that income from these units shall be credited and all the. cost necessary to run the unit shall be debited. These expenses will include cost directly attributable to these units

RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T, RANGE-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed and the Assessee’s appeal in I

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2113/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2150/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2006-07 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2114/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2151/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 760/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 762/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-12, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2655 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

801A(5) states that the profit & gains from these units to be computed as if such eligible business were the only source of income of the assessee. This means that income from these units shall be credited and all the. cost necessary to run the unit shall be debited. These expenses will include cost directly attributable to these units