TIRIYOGI NARAYAN SINGH,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 29, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

depreciation. He also initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act and, thereafter, imposed the impugned penalty. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed

TIRIYOGI NARAYAN SINGH,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 29, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

depreciation. He also initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act and, thereafter, imposed the impugned penalty. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed

DCIT, CC-XIX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ATHA MINES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2012-13

Depreciation taken separately Rs.75,880/- Add: Penalty for delay in T.D.S. Rs. 3,000/- Add: Penalty for Sales Tax Rs.4

DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. LMJ LOGISTICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2007-08

penalty & fines, which are not allowable) 9. Depreciation Rs.11,81,721.00 Rs.37,78,784.00 Net profit Rs.1,60,30,614 (a) Therefore

DCIT, CIR-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S P C CHANDRA (JEWELLERS) PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2011-12 Dct, Crcle-11(2), V/S. M/S P.C. Chandra P-7, Chowringhee (Jewellers), Pvt. Ltd., Square, Kolkta-69 49C, Gaiahat Road, Kolkata-19 [Pan No.Aabcp 8654 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 11-01-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 02-02-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 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 06.07.2015. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-11, Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.08.2013 For Assessment Year 2011-12. Revenue Has Raised Following Ground:- “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Assessee Ld. Cit Has Erred In Deleting The Penalty Of Rs.23,68,786/- Imposed U/S. 271(1)(C) Of The It Act. 1961. 2. That The Appellant Craves For Leave To Add, Delete Or Modify Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal Before Or All The Time Of Hearing.”

depreciation claimed by assessee on land and added to the total income of assessee. However, AO in his assessment proceedings initiated penalty

DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HARBANSLAL MALHOTRA & SONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The A.O. 04. That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That It Is A Fit Case For Imposition Of Penalty U/S 27L(L)(C) Of The Act. 05. That The Department Craves Leave To Add, Modify Or Alter Any Of The Above Ground(S) Of Appeal And/Or Adduce Additional Evidence At The Time Of Hearing Of The Case.

depreciation of Rs.4,54,600/- on machinery put to use by 31-03-2004. These two additions were added back to the total income of the assessee. This action of the AO was confirmed by the CIT-A in the first appellate proceeding. 5. Thereafter, the AO initiated penalty

DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KARNATAKA vs. M/S ASSOCIATED ALCOHOLS & BREWERIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year:2009-10 Dcit, Circle-12, P-7, V/S. M/S Associated Alcohols Chowringhee Square & Breweries Ltd. 106A, Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Shyam Bazar, Station, Floor, Kolkata-69 Ground Floor, Kolkata-05 [Pan No.Aaeca 2674 B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

penalty could not have been imposed even in respect of claim of depreciation made by the assessee. this al is accordingly

M/S. BARDHAMAN DHARMARAJ PAPER MILL PVT. LTD.,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, BURDWAN

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year : 2015-16

depreciation on account of addition to shad and building and addition to plant and machinery. Since the assessee has concealed particular of income penalty

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BURDWAN, BURDWAN vs. M/S. BARDHAMAN DHARMARAJ PAPER MILL PVT. LTD., BURDWAN

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year : 2015-16

depreciation on account of addition to shad and building and addition to plant and machinery. Since the assessee has concealed particular of income penalty

M/S MAA ENGINEERING,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-51, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

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

depreciation claimed by the assessee and added back the same to the total income of the assessee. Thereafter penalty proceedings

AMAN TANNERY ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 29(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14 Aman Tannery V/S. Income Tax Officer 93/1D, Tiljala Road, Ward-29(1), 54/1 Rafi Park Circus, Kolkata-46 Aahmed Kidwai Road, [Wellesly Road], 5Th [Pan No.Aakfa 7826 J] Floor, Kolkata-700 016 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 17-12-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 23-12-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8 Kolkata’S Order Dated 28.06.2018 Passed In Case No. Cit(A),Kolkata-8/10190/2016-17, Confirming The Assessing Officer’S Action Imposing Penalty Of ₹30,15,402/- In Order Dated 19.09.2016 In Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; ‘The Act’. Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. It Is Accordingly Proceeded Ex Parte. 2. We Have Heard The Learned Departmental Representative Strongly Supporting The Impugned Penalty Of ₹9,31,759/- Imposed In Both The Lower Proceedings On The Ground That The Assessee’S Depreciation Claim Of

penalty of ₹9,31,759/- imposed in both the lower proceedings on the ground that the assessee’s depreciation claim

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PARIJAT VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

depreciation of Rs.28,17,935/- @ 30% on payloaders which are also being used in the business of running them on hire. As penalty

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PARIJAT VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

depreciation of Rs.28,17,935/- @ 30% on payloaders which are also being used in the business of running them on hire. As penalty

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. ADARSH HEIGHTS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

penalty in this case stating that addition of Rs.5,10,82,386/- as disallowance interest and of 35,84,617/- (Rs.27,13,591/- & Rs.8,71,026/- ) as disallowance of depreciation

M/S AKANKSHA VINIYOG LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD -1(4), KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2006-07

depreciation and insurance expenses to the total income of the assessee. In respect of the addition made in the course of assessment proceedings the AO initiated penalty

MANOJ KUMAR CHOWDHURY ,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD - 61(4) , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Manoj Kumar Chowdhury Vs. Ito, Ward-61(4), Kolkata

depreciation on asset/equipment which did not exist or which was never supplied, assessee had not only concealed particulars of its income, but had also furnished inaccurate particulars of income, therefore, penalty

SHYAM SUNDAR HAZRA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 33(4) , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Shyam Sundar Hazra Vs. Ito, Ward-33(4), Kolkata

depreciation on asset/equipment which did not exist or which was never supplied, assessee had not only concealed particulars of its income, but had also furnished inaccurate particulars of income, therefore, penalty

SHREE BALAJI PLYWOOD,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 48(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Shree Balaji Plywood Vs. Ito, Ward-48(4), Kolkata

depreciation on asset/equipment which did not exist or which was never supplied, assessee had not only concealed particulars of its income, but had also furnished inaccurate particulars of income, therefore, penalty

NATHMAL SARAF CHARITY TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 1(1)(EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Nathmal Saraf Charity Trust Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1)(Exemption), Kolkata

depreciation on asset/equipment which did not exist or which was never supplied, assessee had not only concealed particulars of its income, but had also furnished inaccurate particulars of income, therefore, penalty