TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

gain, the provision of Section 50C would be applicable. (e) The Ld. CIT(A) uphold the action of the AO of not referring the matter to the DVO. Tata Consumer Products Ltd. {erstwhile Tata Global Beverages Ltd.} AYs: 2014-15 & 2015-16 (f) The Ld. CIT(A) held that the acceptable variation range of (+/-) 15% does not exist within

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

gain, the provision of Section 50C would be applicable. (e) The Ld. CIT(A) uphold the action of the AO of not referring the matter to the DVO. Tata Consumer Products Ltd. {erstwhile Tata Global Beverages Ltd.} AYs: 2014-15 & 2015-16 (f) The Ld. CIT(A) held that the acceptable variation range of (+/-) 15% does not exist within

DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S THE DIAMOND COMPANY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2009-10

section 14A – CIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd [2007] 12 SOT 248 (Mu.). however, there is merit in the alternative ground taken by the appellant that the AO ought to have excluded the value of investments in units of debt/liquid fund with growth option, debentures & share warrant which are not capable of yielding any dividend income at all and capital

SRI CHANDRA MOHAN GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 30(2),KOLKATA., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1282/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

248) has held that goodwill is in the nature of an intangible capital asset and any gain arising on its transfer is taxable by way of capital gain. Section

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. IMC LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

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

capital gain income in the revised return of income which is within the provisions of the law. As such the AO has not brought any defect in the books of accounts and in the revised return. The assessee has been showing investments in the audited financial statements. The ld. DR has also not brought anything on record to controvert

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. I M C LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

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

capital gain income in the revised return of income which is within the provisions of the law. As such the AO has not brought any defect in the books of accounts and in the revised return. The assessee has been showing investments in the audited financial statements. The ld. DR has also not brought anything on record to controvert

M/S. IMC LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

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

capital gain income in the revised return of income which is within the provisions of the law. As such the AO has not brought any defect in the books of accounts and in the revised return. The assessee has been showing investments in the audited financial statements. The ld. DR has also not brought anything on record to controvert

SAMIT RAY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. 3(4), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 778/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Arati Ray,………………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Adopr8465R] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 779/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Mallika Roy,…………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Acgpr7888F] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 780/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 1

section 48 of the Income Tax Act ought to be deemed equivalent to the amount on which stamp duty was paid. In other words, this valuation of the Stamp Duty Authority amounting to Rs.1,35,19,972/- ought to be deemed as full sale consideration for the purpose of computing long-term capital gain. Therefore, in his opinion, the assessment

ARATI RAY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. -3(4), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 778/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Arati Ray,………………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Adopr8465R] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 779/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Mallika Roy,…………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Acgpr7888F] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 780/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 1

section 48 of the Income Tax Act ought to be deemed equivalent to the amount on which stamp duty was paid. In other words, this valuation of the Stamp Duty Authority amounting to Rs.1,35,19,972/- ought to be deemed as full sale consideration for the purpose of computing long-term capital gain. Therefore, in his opinion, the assessment

MALIKA ROY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. 3(4), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 778/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Arati Ray,………………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Adopr8465R] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 779/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Mallika Roy,…………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Acgpr7888F] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 780/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 1

section 48 of the Income Tax Act ought to be deemed equivalent to the amount on which stamp duty was paid. In other words, this valuation of the Stamp Duty Authority amounting to Rs.1,35,19,972/- ought to be deemed as full sale consideration for the purpose of computing long-term capital gain. Therefore, in his opinion, the assessment

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

DCIT(EXAMPTION), CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MAA SARASWATI GYAN MANDIR EDUCATION SOCIETY , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2002/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit(Exemption), Circle- Vs. Maa Saraswati Gyan Mandir 1(1), Kolkata

capital gains qualify for exemption u/s 11 (1A) of the Act. 11. Ground No. 4 raised by the Revenue reads as follows: 7 Maa Saraswati Gyan Mandir Education Society Assessment Year:2012-13 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing administrative and establishment expenses

GUNJA SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD,PURULIA vs. PCIT,, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Gunja Samabay Krishi Pcit, Asansol Unnayan Samity Ltd. Vill. Gunja, Golbera, P.S. Vs. Joypur, Dist. Purulia, Pin. 723103 Pan: Aabag 2110 M (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gains of the assessee chargeable to tax as per provision of section 111A of the Act.” 7. Subsequently, the ld. PCIT on examination and verification of assessment record observed that the assessee had earned an amount of Rs. 39,44,212/- as interest income on deposits with Banks namely IDBI, Axis and Bandhan Bank which has been claimed

KIRAN KOTHARI HUF,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 35(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

248 (SC) wherein it was held that the statement recorded on oath u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value, since during survey, authorities under the Act has not been empowered to administer oath and so any admission made during such statement cannot be made the sole basis of addition. (h) The Ld AR relied on the following decisions

NARAYAN SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

capital gains which in\nthis case were shares. There was no information which shares had\nbeen transferred and with whom the transaction had taken place. The\nA.O. did not verify the correctness of information received by him but\nmerely accepted the truth of the vague information in a mechanical\nmanner. The A.O. had not even recorded his satisfaction about

ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES LIMITED., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A No. 1053/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 A.C.I.T., Circle-11(2) -Vs.- M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 966/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Pvt.Ltd. -Vs- C.I.T.(A)-22, (Formerly “Tcg Lifesciences Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri S.P.Singh, Irs (Rtd.) & Shri Manoneet Dalal & Ms.Gunjan Khanna, Cas Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

248 ITR st 181]. 6. In this appeal we are concerned with two of the International Transactions carried out by the Assessee during the previous year viz., (i) the transaction of purchase of shares of Rishi Parmaceuticals Inc.USA (hereinafter referred to as RPI) and LVSI by the Assessee; (ii) Transaction of providing guarantee by the Assessee to the lender

M/S TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A No. 1053/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 A.C.I.T., Circle-11(2) -Vs.- M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 966/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Pvt.Ltd. -Vs- C.I.T.(A)-22, (Formerly “Tcg Lifesciences Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri S.P.Singh, Irs (Rtd.) & Shri Manoneet Dalal & Ms.Gunjan Khanna, Cas Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

248 ITR st 181]. 6. In this appeal we are concerned with two of the International Transactions carried out by the Assessee during the previous year viz., (i) the transaction of purchase of shares of Rishi Parmaceuticals Inc.USA (hereinafter referred to as RPI) and LVSI by the Assessee; (ii) Transaction of providing guarantee by the Assessee to the lender

SUKHBIR SINGH DHUPIA,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.-CIRCLE-39, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] Assessment Year : 2004-05

section 94(7) of the Act. The taxable income was assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act at Rs. 1,34,70,990/- on 21.12.2006 after making disallowance u/s 94(7) of the Act to the tune of Rs. 25,22,098/-. Later 2 Sukhbir Singh Dhupia A.Yr.2004-05 the assessment was subject to rectification proceedings u/s 154 dated