DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HINDUSTHAN GUM & CHEMICALS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1410/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 7214 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1601 /Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata -Vs- Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 7214 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate Shri Vinod Sharma, Ca For The Respondent : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit

section 32(1) of the Act. Further, balance 50% of initial depreciation, amounting to Rs. 21,71,119/- on such

SAMARTH FABLON PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL - 1, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

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

119/- (for more than 180 days) and Rs.2,06,33,645/- (for less than 180 days). The assessee company claimed depreciation to the tune of Rs.7,17,72,720/- as per the Act including additional depreciation of Rs.1,62,60,216/- and the same was allowed to be carried forwarded by the AO. However, according

M/S VODAFONE EAST LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation whichever is less as per the books of accounts. Consequently, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 31. The next issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) erred that the assessee is entitled to choose 10 consecutive years out of 15 years for deduction

DCIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation whichever is less as per the books of accounts. Consequently, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 31. The next issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) erred that the assessee is entitled to choose 10 consecutive years out of 15 years for deduction

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD., KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation whichever is less as per the books of accounts. Consequently, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 31. The next issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) erred that the assessee is entitled to choose 10 consecutive years out of 15 years for deduction

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation whichever is less as per the books of accounts. Consequently, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 31. The next issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) erred that the assessee is entitled to choose 10 consecutive years out of 15 years for deduction

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation whichever is less as per the books of accounts. Consequently, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 31. The next issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) erred that the assessee is entitled to choose 10 consecutive years out of 15 years for deduction

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation whichever is less as per the books of accounts. Consequently, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 31. The next issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) erred that the assessee is entitled to choose 10 consecutive years out of 15 years for deduction

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation whichever is less as per the books of accounts. Consequently, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 31. The next issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) erred that the assessee is entitled to choose 10 consecutive years out of 15 years for deduction

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. HUTCHISON TELECOM EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation whichever is less as per the books of accounts. Consequently, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 31. The next issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that ld. CIT(A) erred that the assessee is entitled to choose 10 consecutive years out of 15 years for deduction

M/S INSTRUMENTARIUM CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DDIT (IT)-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: The Special Bench:

depreciation of Rs 12,77,67,761. It was also noted that the assessee and Datex India, which was wholly owned subsidiary of the assessee and its marketing arm in India, entered into an agreement dated 26th August 2002 under which the assessee extended an interest free loan denominated in US Dollars, which was equivalent to Rs 36 crores

M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

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

depreciation claimed 7. Large value sale of consideration of property in ITR is less than sale consideration of property reported in TDS return under section 194IA 8. Mismatch in sales turnover reported in Audit Report and ITR 9. Mismatch in amount paid to related persons u/s 40A(2)(b) reported in Audit Report and ITR 4. After conducting enquiries with

M/S. EASTERN SUGAR & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee on grounds No

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1950/Kol/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-2005) M/S Eastern Sugar & Vs. Acit, Cc-Xi, Kolkata, Industries Ltd., C/O M/S Poddar Court Building, Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, 18, Rabindra Sarani, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- Kolkata-700001 700072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2944 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1951/Kol/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-2007) M/S Eastern Sugar & Vs. Acit, Cc-Xi, Kolkata, Industries Ltd., C/O M/S Poddar Court Building, Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, 18, Rabindra Sarani, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- Kolkata-700001 700072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2944 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Pinaki Mukherji, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 15/02/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2004-2005 & 2006-07, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Central-I, Kolkata, In Appeal No.434/Cc-Iv/Cit(A),C-I/08-09, Dated 05.08.2010 & Appeal No.433/Cc-Xi/Cit(A),C-I/08-09, Dated 11.08.2010, Respectively Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer M/S. Eastern Sugar & Industries Ltd. (Ao) Under Section 143 (3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter

section 147. " • MJ. Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs. CIT (2008) 297ITR 119 (Bom) (Assessment Year 2003-2004) In this case, the hon'ble High Court observed as under: "Issue regarding addition of amount of deferred taxation for computing book profits u/s. 115JB having been raised by the AO at the time of original assessment u/s. 143(3} and no addition having been

M/S. EASTERN SUGAR & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee on grounds No

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1950/Kol/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-2005) M/S Eastern Sugar & Vs. Acit, Cc-Xi, Kolkata, Industries Ltd., C/O M/S Poddar Court Building, Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, 18, Rabindra Sarani, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- Kolkata-700001 700072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2944 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1951/Kol/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-2007) M/S Eastern Sugar & Vs. Acit, Cc-Xi, Kolkata, Industries Ltd., C/O M/S Poddar Court Building, Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, 18, Rabindra Sarani, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- Kolkata-700001 700072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2944 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Pinaki Mukherji, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 15/02/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2004-2005 & 2006-07, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Central-I, Kolkata, In Appeal No.434/Cc-Iv/Cit(A),C-I/08-09, Dated 05.08.2010 & Appeal No.433/Cc-Xi/Cit(A),C-I/08-09, Dated 11.08.2010, Respectively Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer M/S. Eastern Sugar & Industries Ltd. (Ao) Under Section 143 (3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter

section 147. " • MJ. Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs. CIT (2008) 297ITR 119 (Bom) (Assessment Year 2003-2004) In this case, the hon'ble High Court observed as under: "Issue regarding addition of amount of deferred taxation for computing book profits u/s. 115JB having been raised by the AO at the time of original assessment u/s. 143(3} and no addition having been

ACIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS(I), LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all appeals of Revenue,( that is, ITA No

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1633, 1634 & 1635/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Acit, Ltu-2, Kolkata Vs. M/S Century Plyboards (I) Ltd. 6Th Floor, Large Tax Payer Unit, 180, 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 700 Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 1682 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Md. Usman, Cit(Dr) Respondent By :Shri D. S. Damle, Fca सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Orderspassed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officerunder Section 143(3)/263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Since, These Three Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. First We Take Revenue’S Appeal In Ita No.1633/Kol/2016, A.Y. 2009- 10. M/S Century Plyboards (I) Ltd.

depreciation on Toll ways due to non fulfillment of ownership criteria in such cases. 4. There is no doubt that where the assessee incurs expenditure on a project for development of roads/highways, he is entitled to recover cost incurred by him towards development of such facility (comprising of construction cost and other pre-operative expenses) during the construction period. Further

ACIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS(I), LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all appeals of Revenue,( that is, ITA No

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1633, 1634 & 1635/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Acit, Ltu-2, Kolkata Vs. M/S Century Plyboards (I) Ltd. 6Th Floor, Large Tax Payer Unit, 180, 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 700 Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 1682 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Md. Usman, Cit(Dr) Respondent By :Shri D. S. Damle, Fca सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Orderspassed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officerunder Section 143(3)/263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Since, These Three Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. First We Take Revenue’S Appeal In Ita No.1633/Kol/2016, A.Y. 2009- 10. M/S Century Plyboards (I) Ltd.

depreciation on Toll ways due to non fulfillment of ownership criteria in such cases. 4. There is no doubt that where the assessee incurs expenditure on a project for development of roads/highways, he is entitled to recover cost incurred by him towards development of such facility (comprising of construction cost and other pre-operative expenses) during the construction period. Further

ACIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS(I), LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all appeals of Revenue,( that is, ITA No

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1633, 1634 & 1635/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Acit, Ltu-2, Kolkata Vs. M/S Century Plyboards (I) Ltd. 6Th Floor, Large Tax Payer Unit, 180, 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 700 Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 1682 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Md. Usman, Cit(Dr) Respondent By :Shri D. S. Damle, Fca सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Orderspassed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officerunder Section 143(3)/263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Since, These Three Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. First We Take Revenue’S Appeal In Ita No.1633/Kol/2016, A.Y. 2009- 10. M/S Century Plyboards (I) Ltd.

depreciation on Toll ways due to non fulfillment of ownership criteria in such cases. 4. There is no doubt that where the assessee incurs expenditure on a project for development of roads/highways, he is entitled to recover cost incurred by him towards development of such facility (comprising of construction cost and other pre-operative expenses) during the construction period. Further

DCIT, CIR-5(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BALMER LAWRIE AND CO LTD. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

depreciation on Toll ways due to non fulfilment of ownership criteria in such cases. 4. There is no doubt that where the assessee incurs expenditure on a project for development of roads/highways, he is entitled to recover cost incurred by him towards development of such facility (comprising of construction cost and other pre-operative expenses) during the constructions cost