LANDIS+GYR LIMITED,SOUTH 24 PARGANAS vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(A), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A No. 524/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13

depreciation has to be granted accordingly. 7. In view of the above, we direct TPO/AO accordingly. Ground No. 6 raised by the assessee are allowed. 8. Ground No. 7 is relating to disallowance of provision for stock obsolescence under normal provisions. 9. Heard both and perused the material available on record. It is noted that the issue raised in Ground

WEST BENGAL STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KARNATAKA

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

43D as ultra virus is stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while admitting the SLP filed by the Revenue, the same has not been reversed and this Tribunal, therefore, is bound to follow the same being a binding precedent. He has also contended that the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court was stayed

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

43D. Section 40 provides for certain disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under other sections. The computation under section 29 is to be made under section 145 on the basis of the books regularly maintained by the assessee. If those books are not correct or complete, the Income-tax Officer may reject those books

EXIDE INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

43D as ultra virus is stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while admitting the SLP filed by the Revenue, the same has not been reversed and this Tribunal, therefore, is bound to follow the same being a binding precedent. He has also contended that the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court was stayed

EXIDE INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2005-06

43D as ultra virus is stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while admitting the SLP filed by the Revenue, the same has not been reversed and this Tribunal, therefore, is bound to follow the same being a binding precedent. He has also contended that the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court was stayed

EXIDE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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

depreciation thereon. 23. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. It is not in dispute that the ERP package was originally purchased and installed by the assessee in the I.T.A. No. 189/KOL./2007 Assessment year: 2003-2004 & I.T.A. No. 1414/KOL/2007 Assessment Year : 2004-2005 Page 11 of 22 earlier

APEEJAY SURRENDRA CORPORATE SERVICES LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS APEEJAY TEA LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1494/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11)

43D and 40 per cent of the income so computed alone can be assessed under the Act. Sec. 41(2) falls within the scope of s. 29 and only 40 per cent of such income can be subjected to tax under the Act. There cannot be a separate computation of the income under s. 41(2). Under

M/S APEEJAY TEA LIMITED(MARGED WITH APEEJAY SURRENDRA CORPORATE SERVICES LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CC - III,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ]

43D and 40 per cent of the income so computed alone can be assessed under the Act. Sec. 41(2) falls within the scope of s. 29 and only 40 per cent of such income can be subjected to tax under the Act. There cannot be a separate computation of the income under s. 41(2). Under