ACIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

163 ITR 769 (MP) 3. Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT 82 ITR 363 (SC) 4. Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) 5. ITAT, Kolkata C Bench Rallis India Ltd. v.DCIT Ld. AR also submitted that this Tribunal’s order in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 851/Kol/2008, 1018/Kol/2007 & 1640/Kol/2008

DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

163 ITR 769 (MP) 3. Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT 82 ITR 363 (SC) 4. Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) 5. ITAT, Kolkata C Bench Rallis India Ltd. v.DCIT Ld. AR also submitted that this Tribunal’s order in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 851/Kol/2008, 1018/Kol/2007 & 1640/Kol/2008

ICI INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

163 ITR 769 (MP) 3. Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT 82 ITR 363 (SC) 4. Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) 5. ITAT, Kolkata C Bench Rallis India Ltd. v.DCIT Ld. AR also submitted that this Tribunal’s order in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 851/Kol/2008, 1018/Kol/2007 & 1640/Kol/2008

RAJIB CHAKRABORTY,KOLKATA vs. ITO- WARD-30(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

163 (Karnataka). The operative part is reproduced as under: “4.1 Re.QuestionNo.2 : "As is clear from Sub-section (4) in the event of the assessee not investing the capital gains

M/S. STP LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. Dcit, Circle-10, Kolkata M/S Stp Limited C/O. G.P. Agarwal & Associates, 7A, Kiran Shankar Ray Road, 2Nd Floor, Kol-1. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs6339M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

capital gain. Therefore, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Subsequently assessee signed another Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] with M/s. ARA Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. on 07.02.2008. However, the terms and conditions of this agreement show that the second agreement is in nature of transfer of assessee's Lease hold Rights in favour of M/s. ARA Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., through

ZAFAR IQBAL,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

163/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection (in short 'CASS'). Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. The Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') noted that the assessee had sold his landed properties measuring 3.55 acres for ₹4,17,50,000/- on which Long Term Capital Gain

SHRI VIJAY MAHIPAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 502/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Vijay Mahipal -Vs- Ito, Ward-4(4), Kolkata [Pan: Aekpm 9834 J] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 54F is justified in the year the stipulated time period for purchase of new house or construction of new house expires. Considering the above facts I hold that the assessee is entitled to exemption U/S 54F to the extent of investment of Rs. 3,50,000/- made for purchase of land for the purpose of construction of residential house

ITO, WD-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PIONEER IRON & STEEL CORPORATION PVT. LTD., HOWRAH

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.203/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito, Ward-3(3), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Pioneer Iron & Steel Corporation (P) Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 4Th Floor, 6, Tarachand Ganguly Street, Howrah – Chowringhee Sq., Kolkata – 700 069. 711202. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aabcp 6093 L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

163/-. During the scrutiny proceedings, it was observed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee disclosed capital gain of Rs 20,65,700/- out of transfer of 227Cottahs of land at Howrah in Kolkata. The valuation report for arriving at the valuation as on 01.04.1981 and on the date of transfer was furnished by the assessee. The valuation

MITUL PRAVINCHANDRA MALANI, ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 33, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed while the penalty of ₹9,560/- imposed is hereby cancelled

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2014-15

section 271(1)(c) of the Act were also initiated by the Ld. AO for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and penalty show cause notice was issued to the appellant. Consequently, penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was passed on 28.06.2017 levying a penalty of Rs. 9,560/- against the assessee for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income

EXIM SCRIPS DEALERS PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD-5(3), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 502/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Exim Scrips Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3), 412, Mukti Chambers Kolkata Vs 4Th Floor 4, Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaace6906E] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Girish Sharma, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/09/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Pr. Cit”) Dt. 10/06/2020, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. This Assessee’S Appeal Is Time Barred By 43 Days. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed. We Have Heard Both The Sides & Find That There Is Reasonable Cause For Delay In Filing Of The Appeal On Time. Hence We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing.

Gain to large number of persons in lieu of unaccounted cash. The basic objective of this racket is to convert black money into white without payment of Income Tax. In the list of the companies, directly or indirectly owned by the operators and whose share prices have been apparently manipulated by the said syndicate, the afore-stated six scrips also

RATNABALI CAPITAL MARKETS PVT. LTD., [EARLIER KNOWN AS RATNABALI CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,],KOLKATA vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE - 12, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.356/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

gain income earned by the assessee reveals that most of the exempt dividend income has been received on following shares: that most of the exempt dividend income has been received on following shares: that most of the exempt dividend income has been received on following shares: It is seen that investment in these three instruments have been made mainly

SHRI DIPENDRA NATH CHUNDER,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-54(4), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three writ petitions succeed and are allowed and the impugned notices dated 23rd

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2009-10

Capital Gain Scheme and withdrawn on maturity after three years. The assessee did not utilize the proceeds for either purchase or construction of a new property within the period as specified u/s.54 of I.T. Act 1961. As per proviso 1(i) below section 54 “The amount not so utilized shall be charged under section 45 as income of the previous

RADIX TIE-UP PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-11(2), KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Sri S. S. Godara] आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.2404/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Radix Tie-Up Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-11(2), Kolkata 184/A, Regent Colony, Tollygunge, Kolkata – 700001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecr1237M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 4, Kolkata’S Order Dated 10.05.2019 Passed In Case No.791/Cit(A)-4/16-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. For The Reasons Stated In Assessee’S Condonation Petition Dated 27.01.20 Explaining Five Days’ Delay To Be Attributable To Various Procedural Aspects & Compilation Of Necessary Records & On Account Of No Objection From The Revenue Side, I Condone The Impugned Delay Of Five Days In Filing Of The Instant Appeal & Proceed To Adjudicate The Same On Merits.

163 and the assessment, reassessment or recomputation to be made in pursuance of the notice is to be made on him as the agent of such non-resident, the notice shall not be issued after the expiry of a period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. I.T.A No.2404/Kol/2019 Radix

ACIT, CIR-32, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. JITENDRA SETH, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2012-13 Acit, Circle-32, Jitendra Seth बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, 87, Karnani Estate, 209, / 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-71 V/S. A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700 017 [Pan No.Ajhs 9552 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-07-2018 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 Challenges Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.03.2016 Passed In Case No. 749/Cit(A)-9/Cir-32/2014-15/Kol, Reversing Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Assessee’S Commission Paid Of ₹51,56,694/- As Well As Partly Restricting Section 54F Deduction Disallowance To ₹42,39,181/- Out Of ₹56,52,242/-; Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’ Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

163 and the indexed cost of the property was determined at Rs.74,93,295. Thus the capital gains was determined at Rs.173,46,704/-. Out of this the assessee invested Rs.50,00,000 was deposited in bonds eligible u/s. 54FC of the IT act 1961 and the balance amount of capital gains of Rs.1,23,46,704 was liable

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

163-170 of Judicial PB]; (iii) Dy.CIT vs K.S. Diesels Ltd (132 taxmann.com 74) [ITAT Mumbai] [Pages 171 -176 of Judicial PB]. 9. Ld. A.R. also referred to the reconciliation of the details of reversals during the year vis-a-vis the provisions made in earlier years alongwith details of disallowances made under section 43B of the Act in those

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

capital gains tax and income from such investments is not exempt under the provisions of the Act. He argued that even in respect of the assessee's investments in other schemes of mutual funds providing for payment of dividend, the assessee is liable for capital gains tax upon disposal/redemption of the units since such schemes are also not equity oriented

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

capital gains tax and income from such investments is not exempt under the provisions of the Act. He argued that even in respect of the assessee's investments in other schemes of mutual funds providing for payment of dividend, the assessee is liable for capital gains tax upon disposal/redemption of the units since such schemes are also not equity oriented

BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

capital gains tax and income from such investments is not exempt under the provisions of the Act. He argued that even in respect of the assessee's investments in other schemes of mutual funds providing for payment of dividend, the assessee is liable for capital gains tax upon disposal/redemption of the units since such schemes are also not equity oriented