GLOSTER LIMITEDN (FORMERLY KNOWN AS GLOSTER JUTE MILLS LIMITED ),KOLKATA vs. CIT-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

depreciation. 5 Gloster Limited A.Yr.2007-08 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the assessee and the learned DR. The learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as were made before CIT. It was further submitted

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]

5 to 7 are accordingly allowed. 32. In Ground Nos. 8 & 9 the assessee objected to Ld. Pr. CIT’s finding with reference to reasons set out in Para 3(c) of the SCN which read as follows: “Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act was not made by the A.O keeping in view the circular No. 5/2014 (F.No. 225/182/2013-ITA.II) dated

BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 43B(f) of the Act in the remand proceedings.” 3.1. The Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred by allowing the claim of balance additional depreciation of Rs.1,43,97,535/-. 2. Whether

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 43B(f) of the Act in the remand proceedings.” 3.1. The Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred by allowing the claim of balance additional depreciation of Rs.1,43,97,535/-. 2. Whether

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 43B(f) of the Act in the remand proceedings.” 3.1. The Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred by allowing the claim of balance additional depreciation of Rs.1,43,97,535/-. 2. Whether

BIRLA CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-6(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 43B(f) of the Act in the remand proceedings.” 3.1. The Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred by allowing the claim of balance additional depreciation of Rs.1,43,97,535/-. 2. Whether

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:

43,83,696/- in the final assessment order dated April 29, 2022. Ground 5(b): That further and in any event and without prejudice to the grounds taken hereinabove, the Learned AO grossly erred in making an arithmetical error in computation of assessed income at Rs. 14,76,67,699/- instead of Rs. 6,92,92,885/- in the final

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:

43,83,696/- in the final assessment order dated April 29, 2022. Ground 5(b): That further and in any event and without prejudice to the grounds taken hereinabove, the Learned AO grossly erred in making an arithmetical error in computation of assessed income at Rs. 14,76,67,699/- instead of Rs. 6,92,92,885/- in the final

JCIT, (OSD), CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HI-TECH SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 43-45/Kol/2016 (Arising Out Of I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016) Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. -Vs- Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

43-45/Kol/2016 M/s Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. A.Yrs.2006-07,2007-08&2008-09 of the assessee together including the business of generation of electricity from the Dhule Unit. This would require add back of the entire book depreciation and corresponding allowance of depreciation u/s 32 of the Act on all the depreciable assets used in the assessee

JCIT, (OSD), CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HI-TECH SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 43-45/Kol/2016 (Arising Out Of I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016) Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. -Vs- Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

43-45/Kol/2016 M/s Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. A.Yrs.2006-07,2007-08&2008-09 of the assessee together including the business of generation of electricity from the Dhule Unit. This would require add back of the entire book depreciation and corresponding allowance of depreciation u/s 32 of the Act on all the depreciable assets used in the assessee

JCIT, (OSD), CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HI-TECH SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 43-45/Kol/2016 (Arising Out Of I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016) Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. -Vs- Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

43-45/Kol/2016 M/s Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. A.Yrs.2006-07,2007-08&2008-09 of the assessee together including the business of generation of electricity from the Dhule Unit. This would require add back of the entire book depreciation and corresponding allowance of depreciation u/s 32 of the Act on all the depreciable assets used in the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TATA METALIKS LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

5(2) (b) of the Act. What is contended on behalf of the Revenue is that under Section 9(1) (i) it can "look through" the transfer of shares of a foreign company holding shares in an Indian company and treat the transfer of shares of the foreign company as equivalent to the transfer of the shares of the Indian

TATA METALIKS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

5(2) (b) of the Act. What is contended on behalf of the Revenue is that under Section 9(1) (i) it can "look through" the transfer of shares of a foreign company holding shares in an Indian company and treat the transfer of shares of the foreign company as equivalent to the transfer of the shares of the Indian

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

Section 43(6)(c) read with Section 32 of the Act, and therefore Section 50C is not applicable, reliance in this regard is placed on the following- -Decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Eveready Industries India Ltd. -vs.- PCIT (2020) 181 ITD 528 (Kolkata Trib.) wherein the Hon'ble ITAT has held that while computing

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

Section 43(6)(c) read with Section 32 of the Act, and therefore Section 50C is not applicable, reliance in this regard is placed on the following- -Decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Eveready Industries India Ltd. -vs.- PCIT (2020) 181 ITD 528 (Kolkata Trib.) wherein the Hon'ble ITAT has held that while computing

D.C.I.T CIR - 5,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee as well as appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 43. 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred din allowing deduction of the compensation amount from the cost of asset as depreciation

D.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Years: 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Income-Tax, Central G.K. Tower Vs. Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, Camac Street Kolkata -700017 (Pan: Aaace4975B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

43(1) for the purpose allowing depreciation.” In light of the above decisions, we hold that tile amount of Rs.55,79,540/- disallowed on ground of excess depreciation claim, should be allowed, Thus Gr.No.5 raised by the Revenue is dismissed.” 8 AY: 2016-17 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. 6.1 Subsequently, the Co-ordinate bench of ITAT, Kolkata vide its order

DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the ground nos. 8 & 9 in ITA No. 451/Kol/2013 raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganeshita No. 1622/Kol/2011 A.Y 2008-09

43 to 44 of Paper Book of assessee. We find from the provisions of DVC Act, 1948, the assessee Corporation does not conduct any annual general meeting. We hold that Section 115JB of Income Tax Act overrides all other provisions of Income Tax Act as it starts with a non obstante clause. Hence it is an independent code by itself