DCIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia): “1. Clause (29BA) inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.e.f. 01.04.2009, defines the expression ‘manufacture as under: ‘manufacture’, with its grammatical variations, means a change in a non- living physical object or article or thing, (a) Resulting in transformation of the object

DCIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia): “1. Clause (29BA) inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.e.f. 01.04.2009, defines the expression ‘manufacture as under: ‘manufacture’, with its grammatical variations, means a change in a non- living physical object or article or thing, (a) Resulting in transformation of the object

WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia): “1. Clause (29BA) inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.e.f. 01.04.2009, defines the expression ‘manufacture as under: ‘manufacture’, with its grammatical variations, means a change in a non- living physical object or article or thing, (a) Resulting in transformation of the object

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PAHARPUR COOLING TOWERS LTD., , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 14A(2) read with Rule 8D, the AR replied that the expenses allocated by the Applicant as per working statement filed is actually less that the amount offered on the basis followed by the AO in earlier years as aforesaid, and hence the question of "dissatisfaction" is ruled out in the present case but none the less

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PAHARPUR COOLING TOWERS LTD., , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 14A(2) read with Rule 8D, the AR replied that the expenses allocated by the Applicant as per working statement filed is actually less that the amount offered on the basis followed by the AO in earlier years as aforesaid, and hence the question of "dissatisfaction" is ruled out in the present case but none the less

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PAHARPUR COOLING TOWERS LTD., , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 14A(2) read with Rule 8D, the AR replied that the expenses allocated by the Applicant as per working statement filed is actually less that the amount offered on the basis followed by the AO in earlier years as aforesaid, and hence the question of "dissatisfaction" is ruled out in the present case but none the less

CAROLINA FOOD AND INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

section 32 of the Act. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –vs.-Smifs Securities Ltd. (2012) 348 ITR 302 (SC) has held the similar issue in favour of the assessee. The ld Counsel also cited several other decisions passed by various High Courts and Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal, which are as under:- 9 Assessment Year

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S G.K.ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross objection of the different assessees are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar] "ी संजय गग" "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम"

depreciation allowance or any other allowance as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year); A bare reading of the foregoing provision suggests that if the assessing officer has the reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. GAURAV ROSE REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross objection of the different assessees are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar] "ी संजय गग" "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम"

depreciation allowance or any other allowance as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year); A bare reading of the foregoing provision suggests that if the assessing officer has the reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment

SHRI HRIBU BOSE,ASANSOL vs. I.T.O, WARD-1(2), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

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

171 Taxmann 474/305 ITR 132(SC) that depreciation block of 30% is applicable only when assessee is in business of hiring out its buses, lorries or taxies. Here assessee used his all dumpers for own business. The specific and rationale finding of A.O. is not being taken into concern by Ld.CIT (A). 4) That Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal

DCIT, CC-XIX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL CONVEYORS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Dr. A.L.Saini, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm It(Ss)A No.131/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S.International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) It(Ss)A No.90/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) It(Ss)A No.91/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) It(Ss)A No.92/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Dcit, Cc-Xix, Kolkata Vs. M/S International Conveyors Pvt.Ltd.,10,Middletion Row, Kolkata-700071 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaci 6161 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

depreciation with the business income in determining the quantum of deduction available u/s 80-1A. 3 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT (A) erred in interpreting the provision of section 80-IA(5), specially with regards to the initial Assessment year, since the assessee's option to select the initial

SUPER REGRACTORIES,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O, WARD-1(4), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation of Rs.2,18,917/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) along with questionnaire were duly signed and served upon the assessee. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 18.12.2008, the total loss of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.1

ORIENT PAPER & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RANGE - 6,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal in ITA 430/Kol/2013 of assessee is partly allowed and appeal in ITA 648/Kol/2013 of the revenue is dismissed

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

171 and pointed out that the decision of the Tribunal in the said case to allow certain claim made by the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal was not upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court. It is, however, observed that new claim made by the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal in the said case

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

171 -176 of Judicial PB]. 9. Ld. A.R. also referred to the reconciliation of the details of reversals during the year vis-a-vis the provisions made in earlier years alongwith details of disallowances made under section 43B of the Act in those respective years, filed before the ld. PCIT. The ld. A.R. also referred to the relevant extracts

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

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

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

171/- in the computation of income in the year under consideration. These expenses were disallowed in the earlier years on account of non-deduction of TDS under section 40(a)(ia). Now the assessee deducted the TDS and deposited the amount in bank in the year under consideration. Hence the deduction was claimed. However, AO observed that no evidence

JAIN INFRA PROJECTS LTD.(SINCE TAKEN OVER BANGAL CONSTRUCTION CO.),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

depreciation of Rs. 9,04,543/- from M/s D.K. Enterprises. M/s D.K.Enterprises was claimed to be the proprietary concern of Manoj Kumar Jain & Sons (HUF). The assessee in effect admitted additional income of Rs. 9,04,543/- in the assessment proceedings. During the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act, the assessee claimed that it had made voluntary

M/S CHENGMARI TEA CO. LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-4(1), KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Years: 2014-15

171 [2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC)/20001 159 CTR 1 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that where Assessing Officer had accepted entry in statement of account filed by assessee, in absence of aI1) supporting material without making any enquiry, exercise of jurisdiction by Commissioner under section 263(1) was justified. (iii) Raimandir Estates (P) Ltd Vs PCIT

ACIT, CIR-1, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. SHRI RAKESH KUMAR CHOWDHURY, DURGAPUR

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

depreciation and interest and remuneration of the partners. Accordingly, we direct the AO to compute the income of the assessee afresh. Accordingly, this ground of the assessee appeal is partly allowed." The aforesaid judgment was followed in case of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal- Hyderabad M/s Balaji Constructions, .... Vs Department of Income Tax, ITA No. 1349/Hyd/2012, A.Y. 2009-10 wherein

SHRI RAKESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

depreciation and interest and remuneration of the partners. Accordingly, we direct the AO to compute the income of the assessee afresh. Accordingly, this ground of the assessee appeal is partly allowed." The aforesaid judgment was followed in case of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal- Hyderabad M/s Balaji Constructions, .... Vs Department of Income Tax, ITA No. 1349/Hyd/2012, A.Y. 2009-10 wherein