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

capital gain cannot be computed. While taking this view, he derive support from the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.C.Srinivasa Setty 128 ITR 294 relied upon by the him. The ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Coromandel Fertilisers Ltd. 90 ITD 439 (Hyd) (supra) held that it is not possible to determine the cost

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

capital gain cannot be computed. While taking this view, he derive support from the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.C.Srinivasa Setty 128 ITR 294 relied upon by the him. The ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Coromandel Fertilisers Ltd. 90 ITD 439 (Hyd) (supra) held that it is not possible to determine the cost

DEVENDRA KUMAR SHROFF,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-7(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: "ीजे. सुधाकररे"डी, लेखासद"यएवं/And"ीऐ. ट". वक","यायीकसद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Capital Gain (hereinafter LTCG) from sale of property when, according to assessee, there was diversion of income due to overriding title. 5. Briefly stated facts of the case as emanating from the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) are that in this case notice

MARUTI TRADERS & INVESTORS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIRCLE 31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 846/Kol/2017 I.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14

section 14A of the Act and depending upon the facts of each case, the expenditure incurred in acquiring those shares and maintaining those shares would have to be apportioned between taxable and exempt income. The ld AR placed reliance on the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of DCIT vs S.G. Investments & Industries

MARUTI TRADERS & INVESTORS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 846/Kol/2017 I.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14

section 14A of the Act and depending upon the facts of each case, the expenditure incurred in acquiring those shares and maintaining those shares would have to be apportioned between taxable and exempt income. The ld AR placed reliance on the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of DCIT vs S.G. Investments & Industries

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

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

191 (P&H), wherein head note Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Business expenditure – Allowability of – Assessment year 2004-05 – Whether where Tribunal had treated expenditure for restructuring and viability study and preparation of restructuring proposal as revenue expenditure by recording findings of fact that expenses were incurred for purpose of business and were in conformity with

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

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

191 (P&H), wherein head note Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Business expenditure – Allowability of – Assessment year 2004-05 – Whether where Tribunal had treated expenditure for restructuring and viability study and preparation of restructuring proposal as revenue expenditure by recording findings of fact that expenses were incurred for purpose of business and were in conformity with

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

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

191 (P&H), wherein head note Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Business expenditure – Allowability of – Assessment year 2004-05 – Whether where Tribunal had treated expenditure for restructuring and viability study and preparation of restructuring proposal as revenue expenditure by recording findings of fact that expenses were incurred for purpose of business and were in conformity with

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

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

191 (P&H), wherein head note Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Business expenditure – Allowability of – Assessment year 2004-05 – Whether where Tribunal had treated expenditure for restructuring and viability study and preparation of restructuring proposal as revenue expenditure by recording findings of fact that expenses were incurred for purpose of business and were in conformity with

AMIT PAREKH,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-30(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 54 of the Act for claim of deduction. Accordingly, he 1 denied the same and disallowed the sum of Rs.49,69,326/- [ Rs. 59,07,247 – Rs.9,37,921] and added the same to the total income of assessee under LTCG u/s. 54 of the Act. 4. The CIT-A after considering the submissions of assessee restricted the addition

TATA METALIKS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WD-3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

capital gains made on sale of government securities is not required to be treated as part of book profit because only business income is required to be computed in book profit. The facts of the appellant’s case are different as the issue is profit from sale of assets and the decision is prior to the judgment of the Apex

DCIT, CIR-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TATA METALIKS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

capital gains made on sale of government securities is not required to be treated as part of book profit because only business income is required to be computed in book profit. The facts of the appellant’s case are different as the issue is profit from sale of assets and the decision is prior to the judgment of the Apex

SRI SACHINADRA NATH KAYAL,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WD-23(1), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11 Sri Sachindra Nath Kayal Ito Warrd-23(1), बनाम Vill. Makhla-2, P.O. & Aayakar Bhawan, / V/S. P.S. Uttarpara, Khadinamore, Dist.Hooghly Pin 712247 Chinsurah, Hooghly [Pan No.Afepk 7726 E] Pin-712101 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri S.P. Datta, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 24-10-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 26-12-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata Dated 09.07.2015 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11. Penalty Levied By Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 30.04.2013. Shri S.P. Datta, Ld. Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee & Shri Saurbh Kumar, Ld. Departmental Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Revenue.

capital gain only on account of ignorance. The appellant’s explanation cannot be accepted to be satisfactory or bona-fide. It was observed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, while holding that penalty has to be imposed where the appellant is not able to show that the mistake/omission is bonafide, in the case of Commissioner of Income

KANCO ENTERPRISES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shris.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Kanco Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata

191] was disallowed from business expenses to be considered separately as speculative loss. 5. Aggrieved by the stand so taken by the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the addition. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

ANDREW YULE & CO LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, -2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

capital gain earned by the assessee from the sale of shares in question was claimed to be exempt and the matter relating to the said claim was pending before BIFR. He submitted that the Assessing Officer was aware of this position and after examining the relevant details, he took a considerate decision to allow the claim of the assessee

JALAN CARBONS & CHEMICLAS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR 4(2), KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.361/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

Capital Loss of Rs.1,04,40,635 suffered by the Assessee Company on sale of equity shares of its group companies, on the alleged ground that the group of the Assessee is gaining by collusive transactions leading to fictitious loss as the shares of group companies had been sold at a price much lower than its market value without

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KKALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.452/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata Vs Kkalpana Industries India Ltd. 2B, Pretoria Street, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aabck 2239 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 13.11.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070338584(1), For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Ms. Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. A Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Find That The Appeal Of The Revenue Has Been Filed Belatedly By 28 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Thus, The Delay Of 28 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

gains of business, the break-up of Rs.26.69 cr and the reasons as to why the assessee is eligible to claim the same was submitted as follows: Particulars Rs. in Remarks crores Extraordinary Item 26.69 Claim not received from the debited in profit and Insurance Company debited in profit Loss A/c (a) and Loss A/c, being loss incurred

RADHESHYAM AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 32(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is cancelled

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravii.T.A. No. 216/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Radheshyam Agarwal...............................……………....………………...…………………….….Appellant [Pan : Addpa 1746 M] Ito, Ward-32(4), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..…...Respondent Appearances By: None Shri S. Halder, Sr. Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Respondent.

section 50C of the Act was attracted and consequently there was additional capital gain tax of Rs.1,01,191/- was levied