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

256 ITR 625, wherein it has been held that the date of registration is not decisive to ascertain the date of acquisition/ownership of the property. In defence of his argument, ld. A.R. stated that the ld. PCIT’s direction was unjustified and unlawful so far as the provisions of section 56(2)(x) of the Act were

BRAJBHUMI NIRMAAN PRIVATE LIMITED,SALT LAKE vs. ITO, WARD 2(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation;\n(iv) any amount representing provision for taxation, other than amount of tax paid as\ndeduction or collection at source or as advance tax payment as reduced by the amount\nof tax claimed as refund under the Income-tax Act, to the extent of the excess over the\ntax payable with reference to the book profits in accordance with

M/S. MATARANI VINTRADE PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 15(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (Kz) & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13

2. Copy of Audited Accounts for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 3. Copy of Annual Return filed with ROC 4. Details of Fresh Share Capital introduced during the year along with the names, full postal addresses and PAN of all the 38 the share applicant companies. 5. Detailed Fund Flow Statement for the year. 6. Copy of Bank Statement

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

256 ITR 1, has held that the reassessment is permissible where the A.O has passed an assessment order without application of mind . The supreme Court in the case of CIT V Kelvinator (India) Ltd 320 ITR 651, has only settled the law, that change of opinion cannot be basis of reason to believe and review of order under section

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

256 ITR 1, has held that the reassessment is permissible where the A.O has passed an assessment order without application of mind . The supreme Court in the case of CIT V Kelvinator (India) Ltd 320 ITR 651, has only settled the law, that change of opinion cannot be basis of reason to believe and review of order under section

ACIT, CEN. CIR-VI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S J. K. TYRE & INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 143/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2008-09

section 32(2) s it stood prior to the amendment by the Finance Act, 2001 and the decision of the Hon’ble Special Bench of the ITAT in the case of M/s. Times Guarantee Ltd is not before me. The issue relates to the assessment year 2007-08 and does not actually emerge from the order under appeal wherein

HINDUSTAN GUM & CHEMICALS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

depreciation of such 20% which is equal to the actual cost of new plant and machinery, accordingly ground no-1 raised by the assessee is allowed.” Respectfully following the same, we dismiss Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue. 7. The next issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in deleting

DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HINDUSTAN GUMS & CHEMICAL LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

depreciation of such 20% which is equal to the actual cost of new plant and machinery, accordingly ground no-1 raised by the assessee is allowed.” Respectfully following the same, we dismiss Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue. 7. The next issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in deleting

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. E.I.H. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA NO

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

256 – 279 in respect of each of the aforesaid expenditures. We find from the said details that the major expenditure has been incurred in respect of cost of spare parts for maintenance of aircrafts , import of articles such as mineral water, raw meat, liquor etc, expenditure incurred for obtaining fitness certificate after every hours of flying as per international aviation

L & T FINANCE LIMITED (SUCCESSOR OF L & T INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW MERGED),KOLKATA vs. CIT(A),NFAC,ITD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

256 days. The ld. Assessing Officer has filed an application for condonation of delay. He also annexed an affidavit dated 18.04.2023. The ld. Assessing Officer has contended that due to huge workload relating to time barring assessment, this matter skipped from his mind and, therefore, could not be sent for approval etc. within time. The ld. Counsel for the assessee

DCIT, KOLKATA vs. L & T FINANCE LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

256 days. The ld. Assessing Officer has filed an application for condonation of delay. He also annexed an affidavit dated 18.04.2023. The ld. Assessing Officer has contended that due to huge workload relating to time barring assessment, this matter skipped from his mind and, therefore, could not be sent for approval etc. within time. The ld. Counsel for the assessee

EPCOS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NADIA vs. A.C.I.T CIR - 11,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assesee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 1921/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 1998-99 Epcos India Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-11, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaci 6950 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Anup Sinha, Ar For The Respondent : Shri Debashis Lahiri, Jcit, Sr.Dr

256 (Mad) wherein it was held that provision for bad and doubtful debts was an unascertained liability and had to be to added to the book profits. The AO thereafter held that provision for bad debts was an unascertained liability and had to be added back to the computation of book profits as per Explanation (c) to section 115JA(2

SRI MANORANJAN MAITY,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ITO, WD-1, HALDIA, PURBA MEDINIPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm]

section 50(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has to be brought to tax. Hence the Assessing Officer is directed to disallow deprecation of Rs. 123256/- claimed on the motor bus and, bring to tax short term capital (i.e. sales proceeds of Rs.4,20,000 – w.d.v of Rs.410853) in respect of the ceased block of asset of motor

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 14A of the Act. We observe that though the above decision has been rendered in the context of disallowance of interest attributable to funds invested towards tax free income but the same analogy is applicable for considering the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore we are inclined to hold that 17 I.T.A. Nos.1068 & 1166/Kol/2017

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 14A of the Act. We observe that though the above decision has been rendered in the context of disallowance of interest attributable to funds invested towards tax free income but the same analogy is applicable for considering the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore we are inclined to hold that 17 I.T.A. Nos.1068 & 1166/Kol/2017

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 14A of the Act. We observe that though the above decision has been rendered in the context of disallowance of interest attributable to funds invested towards tax free income but the same analogy is applicable for considering the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore we are inclined to hold that 17 I.T.A. Nos.1068 & 1166/Kol/2017

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 14A of the Act. We observe that though the above decision has been rendered in the context of disallowance of interest attributable to funds invested towards tax free income but the same analogy is applicable for considering the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore we are inclined to hold that 17 I.T.A. Nos.1068 & 1166/Kol/2017

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRD COMMODITIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] It(Ss)A Nos.120 To123/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2012-13

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) : Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 To 2011-12

256 ITR 318 [2001] 119 Taxman 863 was with regard to deduction to be made on account of depreciation from the gross receipts while applying net profit rate. It was held on the basis of a circular issued by the Board, which was binding on the revenue that the gross receipts to which net profit rate is to be applied