BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

279 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 69clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,494Delhi992Jaipur345Kolkata279Chennai247Ahmedabad204Bangalore155Surat135Chandigarh128Pune110Karnataka106Hyderabad99Indore80Amritsar61Cochin61Raipur56Nagpur51Rajkot44Calcutta38Cuttack36Visakhapatnam34Guwahati34Jodhpur28Allahabad26Lucknow26Agra20Patna8Dehradun8Telangana7Jabalpur5Ranchi5SC3Varanasi2Panaji1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income83Section 14764Section 143(3)61Section 6858Section 14842Disallowance42Section 25033Unexplained Cash Credit28Section 10(38)

ACIT, CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. BHAWARLAL ALOKE KUMAR , KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 779/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15 Acit, Cicle-34, V/S. Bhawarlal Aloke Kumar Aayakar Poorva, 7Th P-12, New Howrah Bridge Approach Road, 4Th Floor, Floor, 110, Shantipally, Kolkatka-107 Kolkta-700001 [Pan No.Aadfb 0620 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant None ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-02-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 03-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee‘S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata’S Order Dated 23.01.2018 Passed In Case No.224/Cit(A)-10/C-34/14-15/16-17/Kol, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case Called Twice. None Appears At The Assessee’S Behest Despite The Registry Having Sent An Rpad Notice. It Is Accordingly Proceeded Ex Parte. 2. Revenue’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Challenge Correctness Of Cit(A)’S Action Partly Upholding Assessing Officer’S Findings Disallowing Assessee’S Purchase(S) Of ₹3,22,28,000/- Only To The Extent Of 15% Vide Impugned Following Detailed Discussion:- “06. Findings &. Decision:

Section 143(3)

Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961-----------·-------------·------------ ----- -.------- -------------.--- - whether merely because suppliers had not appeared before Assessing Officer or Commissioner (Appeals), it could not be concluded that purchases were not made by assessee - Held, yes [Para 71 [In favour of assessee. The above decision squarely applies to the case of the assessee as entire sales in case of assessee

Showing 1–20 of 279 · Page 1 of 14

...
26
Section 148A26
Exemption22
Section 115J21

OM FORGING & ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE PR. CIT-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals are allowed

ITA 509/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Md.Usman, CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 263

69-153 and 91-203 of assessee’s paper book for A.Y.2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The statement showing the source of funds and the mode of payment for the purchases which were claimed by the revenue to be bogus were also furnished. These details are given as Annexure –I and Annexure-II respectively for A.Y.2010-11

M/S. SAROJ EMBRODS PVT. LTD. ,HOOGHLY vs. DCIT, C.C-3(4), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1352/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

69 of the Act on account of unexplained expenditure which was claimed by the assessee in the form of purchases in the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act vide order dated 29.12.2019. 3 I.T.A. Nos.1351 & 1352/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Saroj Embrods Pvt. Ltd. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the assessee challenged the order

SAROJ EMBRODS PRIVATE LIMITED. ,HOOGHLY vs. DCIT,C.C-3(4), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1351/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

69 of the Act on account of unexplained expenditure which was claimed by the assessee in the form of purchases in the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act vide order dated 29.12.2019. 3 I.T.A. Nos.1351 & 1352/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Saroj Embrods Pvt. Ltd. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the assessee challenged the order

SMT. LAXMI DEVI CHINDALIA ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 35(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2241/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 2241/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Laxmi Devi Chindalia Vs. I.T.O, Ward 34(2) Pan: Acopc8728P Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2242/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Aditya Chindalia Vs. I.T.O, Ward 34(2) Pan: Afkpc6363F Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Surana, FCA, ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT, ld. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 69

section 69 of the Act. In such circumstances the same as follows:- “10. First we will take up for consideration ground no.5 with regard to the addition on account of bogus purchases

SHRI ADITYA CHINDALIA ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 34(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2242/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 2241/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Laxmi Devi Chindalia Vs. I.T.O, Ward 34(2) Pan: Acopc8728P Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2242/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Aditya Chindalia Vs. I.T.O, Ward 34(2) Pan: Afkpc6363F Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Surana, FCA, ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT, ld. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 69

section 69 of the Act. In such circumstances the same as follows:- “10. First we will take up for consideration ground no.5 with regard to the addition on account of bogus purchases

BADAL KRISHNA SAHA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-53(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 672/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ]

For Appellant: Shri K.M.Roy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md.Ghayas Uddin, JCIT.Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 37

section 37 without appreciating that the same is not penal in nature. 4. That CIT(A) has erred in sustaining disallowance of labour charges of Rs. 3,60,500/-. 5. That CIT(A) has erred in sustaining disallowance of hire charges of Rs. 5,60,000/-. 6. That CIT(A) has erred in not allowing deduction

GANAPATI DEVELOPERS ,HOWRAH vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-47, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Madhumita Roy)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 250Section 68

purchases are held as not bogus by the ld. CIT(A), the question of part addition does not arise. Hence these additions as sustained by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of ₹69,527/- is hereby deleted. 17. Coming to the second addition under Section

BINOD KUMAR TEKRIWAL ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 10, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 1132/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkey

Section 139Section 147Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

69- 153 and 91-203 of assessee's paper book for A.Y.2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The statement showing the source of funds and the mode of payment for the purchases which were claimed by the revenue to be bogus were also furnished. These details are given as Annexure -I and Annexure-II respectively for A.Y.2010-11

BINOD KUMAR TEKRIWAL ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 10, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 1133/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkey

Section 139Section 147Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

69- 153 and 91-203 of assessee's paper book for A.Y.2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The statement showing the source of funds and the mode of payment for the purchases which were claimed by the revenue to be bogus were also furnished. These details are given as Annexure -I and Annexure-II respectively for A.Y.2010-11

MRS. PREMLATA TEKRIWAL ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 10, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 1129/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkey

Section 139Section 147Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

69- 153 and 91-203 of assessee's paper book for A.Y.2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The statement showing the source of funds and the mode of payment for the purchases which were claimed by the revenue to be bogus were also furnished. These details are given as Annexure -I and Annexure-II respectively for A.Y.2010-11

MRS. PREMLATA TEKRIWAL ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 10, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 1130/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkey

Section 139Section 147Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

69- 153 and 91-203 of assessee's paper book for A.Y.2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The statement showing the source of funds and the mode of payment for the purchases which were claimed by the revenue to be bogus were also furnished. These details are given as Annexure -I and Annexure-II respectively for A.Y.2010-11

MRS. PREMLATA TEKRIWAL ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 10, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 1131/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkey

Section 139Section 147Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

69- 153 and 91-203 of assessee's paper book for A.Y.2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The statement showing the source of funds and the mode of payment for the purchases which were claimed by the revenue to be bogus were also furnished. These details are given as Annexure -I and Annexure-II respectively for A.Y.2010-11

ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. ABC ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 153/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.153 & 154/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.155 & 156/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Revenue/Department By : Shri A. K. Nayak, Cit Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: The Revenue & Assessee Have Filed Their Instant Cross-Appeals For Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 01.12.2017 Passed In Case No.10147/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 & No.10919/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 Restricting The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing The Entire Purchases Of Rs.4,90,30,444/-

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)

purchases are "bogus" merely on ground of information from Sales Tax Department and non-production of Suppliers before him when the assessee had produced all the relevant materials before him to prove the genuineness of the transaction.  That addition under section 69

ABC ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 156/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.153 & 154/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.155 & 156/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Revenue/Department By : Shri A. K. Nayak, Cit Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: The Revenue & Assessee Have Filed Their Instant Cross-Appeals For Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 01.12.2017 Passed In Case No.10147/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 & No.10919/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 Restricting The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing The Entire Purchases Of Rs.4,90,30,444/-

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)

purchases are "bogus" merely on ground of information from Sales Tax Department and non-production of Suppliers before him when the assessee had produced all the relevant materials before him to prove the genuineness of the transaction.  That addition under section 69

ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. ABC ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 154/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.153 & 154/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.155 & 156/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Revenue/Department By : Shri A. K. Nayak, Cit Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: The Revenue & Assessee Have Filed Their Instant Cross-Appeals For Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 01.12.2017 Passed In Case No.10147/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 & No.10919/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 Restricting The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing The Entire Purchases Of Rs.4,90,30,444/-

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)

purchases are "bogus" merely on ground of information from Sales Tax Department and non-production of Suppliers before him when the assessee had produced all the relevant materials before him to prove the genuineness of the transaction.  That addition under section 69

ABC ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 155/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.153 & 154/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.155 & 156/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Revenue/Department By : Shri A. K. Nayak, Cit Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: The Revenue & Assessee Have Filed Their Instant Cross-Appeals For Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 01.12.2017 Passed In Case No.10147/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 & No.10919/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 Restricting The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing The Entire Purchases Of Rs.4,90,30,444/-

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)

purchases are "bogus" merely on ground of information from Sales Tax Department and non-production of Suppliers before him when the assessee had produced all the relevant materials before him to prove the genuineness of the transaction.  That addition under section 69

ACIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1764/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

section 80-IA(13) does not apply. Explanation to section 80- IA(13) merely distinguishes between a developer and works contractor. It clarifies that a works contractor shall not be included in the category of 'developer' u/s 80-1A. Thus, the Explanation clearly does not apply to O&M projects. Hence, deduction of Rs. 35,16,9411- claimed

ACIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1765/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

section 80-IA(13) does not apply. Explanation to section 80- IA(13) merely distinguishes between a developer and works contractor. It clarifies that a works contractor shall not be included in the category of 'developer' u/s 80-1A. Thus, the Explanation clearly does not apply to O&M projects. Hence, deduction of Rs. 35,16,9411- claimed

M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1573/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

section 80-IA(13) does not apply. Explanation to section 80- IA(13) merely distinguishes between a developer and works contractor. It clarifies that a works contractor shall not be included in the category of 'developer' u/s 80-1A. Thus, the Explanation clearly does not apply to O&M projects. Hence, deduction of Rs. 35,16,9411- claimed