ITO, WD-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BLUE HEAVEN GRIHA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 570/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Ito, Ward-1(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Blue Heaven Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaccb 3287 F ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

13 M/s Blue Heaven Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2006-07 However, notwithstanding such price rise, in accordance with accounting principles, the land held as inventory could only be shown at its cost. Hence there cannot be any undervaluation of land in the books of the assessee and other two partner companies of recording the value of land as alleged

ITO, WD-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORCHID GRIHA NIRMAN PRIVATE LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 569/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Ito, Ward-1(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Orchid Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaaco 7148 L ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

13 M/s Orchid Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2006-07 Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeev Woolen Mills vs CIT reported in 279 ITR 434 (SC) at page 447 and 448 ,as under:- " In the present case, the method adopted by the assessee is to value the closing stock at the market value irrespective of the fact whether

ACIT, CIRCLE - 13(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PADMA LOGISTICS & KHANIJ PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

3) of the Act. Section 72A(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 reads as under: "Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, in the case of a demerger, the accumulated loss and the allowance for unabsorbed depreciation of the demerged company shall – a) where such loss or unabsorbed depreciation is directly relatable to the undertakings transferred

SARDA MINES PVT. LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-05(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 867/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd...............................………………………………………………Appellant 6Th Floor, Circular Court, 8, Ajc Bose Road, Kolkata – 700017. [Pan : Aahcs 2419 R] D.C.I.T., Cir 5(2) Kolkata………………………………………………......................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 69 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Gupta, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Md. Usman, Cit Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 14, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Principal Cit – 2, Kolkata Dated 28.03.2017 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: “1. For That The Order Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -2, Kolkata (In Short ‘Cit’) Dated 28.03.2017 Is Without Jurisdiction & Illegal As None Of The Condition Precedent For Exercise Of The Power Under Section 263 Of The Act Exists And/Or Has Been Satisfied & As Such The Said Order Is Erroneous & Without Jurisdiction & Liable To Be Cancelled. 2. For That The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Was Not In Any Way Erroneous Or Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & As Such The Cit Would Not Exercise Any Power Under Section 263 Of The Act. The Cit Erred In Holding That The Order Of Assessment Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

depreciation the A.O. should have enquired and verified whether the said machines were used by the assessee itself. As regards, the donation of Rs. 50 lacs the A.O. has to enquire and find out the correct facts which were not done earlier.” 8. The Principal CIT accordingly set aside the order passed by the A.O. under section 147/144/143(3) dated

THE PEERLESS GEN. FIN. & INV. CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

depreciable asset forming part of the block of assets ‘building’ was Short Term Capital Gain in terms of section 50 of the Act and, therefore, the Long Term Capital Loss could not be set off against the same. The Assessing Officer also made further disallowances under sections 14A and 40(a)(ia) of the Act determining the total income

D.C.I.T CIR - 7,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S BCH ELECTRIC LTD( FORMERLY M/S BHARTIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Vishwanethra Ravi

depreciation amounting to Rs.78,83,000/-. Grounds of Cross Objection by the assessee 1. That on the facts and on the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) had erred in not appreciating and deciding that the entire proceedings initiated under section 147/148 of the Act was bad in law, illegal, unjustified and abinitio void and the entire assessment

PRIMETALS TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 371 & 372/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 5Th Floor, Tower-C Vs Dlf, It Park-I 08 Majore Arterial Road New Town Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aaecv9657M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate & Pooja Saraf, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1), Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Ao”) Even Dt. 29/04/2022, Passed In Pursuance Of The Directions Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, New Delhi, Dt. 18/02/2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18 & Dt. 04/03/2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18:- “Ground 1:

3 raised for Assessment Year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are dismissed as not pressed. 13. In Ground Nos. 4(a) to 4(g) for Assessment Year 2017-18 and 2018- 19, the issue involved is disallowance of depreciation claimed of goodwill at Rs. 118,51,19,424/- and Rs.88,88,39,567/- for Assessment Years

PRIMETALS TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 371 & 372/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 5Th Floor, Tower-C Vs Dlf, It Park-I 08 Majore Arterial Road New Town Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aaecv9657M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate & Pooja Saraf, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1), Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Ao”) Even Dt. 29/04/2022, Passed In Pursuance Of The Directions Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, New Delhi, Dt. 18/02/2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18 & Dt. 04/03/2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18:- “Ground 1:

3 raised for Assessment Year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are dismissed as not pressed. 13. In Ground Nos. 4(a) to 4(g) for Assessment Year 2017-18 and 2018- 19, the issue involved is disallowance of depreciation claimed of goodwill at Rs. 118,51,19,424/- and Rs.88,88,39,567/- for Assessment Years

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

Bench: The Special Bench:

13. In this context, it is important to notice proviso (ii) to sub- section (2) of Section 245R of the Act, which gives no option to the Authority except to reject I.T.A. Nos.1548 and 1549/Kol/2009 Assessment years: 2003-04 and 2004-05 Page 5 of 41 the application where the question raised in the application involves determination of fair market

M/S. FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

depreciation and interest, the total income of the assessee from the business of dealing in lottery tickets was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.1,72,96,81,920/- for the year under consideration in the assessment completed under section 143(3)/144 vide an order dated 22.03.2013. 5. The records of the assessment made under section 143(3)/144

UCO BANK,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6,, KOLKATA

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

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

depreciation which have been adopted for preparing such accounts including profit and loss account for such financial year or part of such financial year falling within the relevant previous year.” 7.2 Section 211(1), 211(2), 211(3), 211(3A), 211(3B) and 211(3C) of Companies Act 1956: 211. FORM AND CONTENTS OF BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS

ACIT, LTU - 2, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. M/S Uco Bank Acit, Ltu-2, Kolkata 10, Btm, Sarani, Kolkata – 700001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu3561B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

3. The decision of the Tribunal, in the above case, therefore, requires reconsideration as it has ignored vital provision in sub-section (2) of section 115JB and interpretated the provision in such a manner that it has practically carved out an exception from the applicability of these special provisions when no such exception really exists. It has made the application

EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

13©, 25.3 and 25.15b. No rationale behind such an action was questioned. (xi) Foreign currency transaction loss Note 22(c) & 23 not verified as per provision of section 43 of the Act. (xii) Receipts per From 26AS vis-a-vis those disclosed in the accounts were also not checked”. The ld. Principal CIT accordingly issued a notice under section

ACIT, LTU - 2, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

3. The decision of the Tribunal, in the above case, therefore, requires reconsideration as it has ignored vital provision in sub-section (2) of section 115JB and interpretated the provision in such a manner that it has practically carved out an exception from the applicability of these special provisions when no such exception really exists. It has made the application

MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

3. The decision of the Tribunal, in the above case, therefore, requires reconsideration as it has ignored vital provision in sub-section (2) of section 115JB and interpretated the provision in such a manner that it has practically carved out an exception from the applicability of these special provisions when no such exception really exists. It has made the application

HALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while the appeal of revenue is treated as dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 1532/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2003-04 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………….Appellant Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Acit, Circle 8 Kolkata,...................…………………………………………………….Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 167/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 11(1) Kolkata.............................………………………………………..Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………Respondent Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Appearances By: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

depreciation of Rs. 1,10,08,966/- allegedly made by the assessee which, according to the Assessing Officer, had resulted in escapement of income due to failure of the assessee to disclose all the facts fully and truly necessary for assessment. In this regard, the learned counsel for the assessee has pointed out that a note was given 8 I.T.A

DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while the appeal of revenue is treated as dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 1532/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2003-04 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………….Appellant Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Acit, Circle 8 Kolkata,...................…………………………………………………….Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 167/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 11(1) Kolkata.............................………………………………………..Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………Respondent Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Appearances By: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

depreciation of Rs. 1,10,08,966/- allegedly made by the assessee which, according to the Assessing Officer, had resulted in escapement of income due to failure of the assessee to disclose all the facts fully and truly necessary for assessment. In this regard, the learned counsel for the assessee has pointed out that a note was given 8 I.T.A

THE UNITED PROVINCES SUGAR COMPANY LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation and had deleted the adhoc disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, the gross total and had deleted the adhoc disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, the gross total and had deleted the adhoc disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, the gross total income of the assessee as well as the total income was Nil and there