D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

12, as well as respectfully bound by the orders of the\nHon'ble ITAT for the A.Ys 2010-11 and 2011-12, in this year also this ground\nis partly allowed, meaning thereby that 10% of the overall disallowance\nremains confirmed, being treated as capital in nature, and the appellant is\nrelieved of the balance 90% of the disallowance

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

12, as well as respectfully bound by the orders of the\nHon'ble ITAT for the A.Ys 2010-11 and 2011-12, in this year also this ground\nis partly allowed, meaning thereby that 10% of the overall disallowance\nremains confirmed, being treated as capital in nature, and the appellant is\nrelieved of the balance 90% of the disallowance

RITA GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR.2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

disallowing the claim of set off was upheld by the successive appellate authorities on. On reference u/s 256(1) of the Act, the Hon’ble High Court held that Section 10(27) of the Act excluded term only the income derived from a business of livestock breeding or poultry or dairy farming. The said section did not exclude the business

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

12, as well as respectfully bound by the orders of the\nHon'ble ITAT for the A.Ys 2010-11 and 2011-12, in this year also this ground\nis partly allowed, meaning thereby that 10% of the overall disallowance\nremains confirmed, being treated as capital in nature, and the appellant is\nrelieved of the balance 90% of the disallowance

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

10(34) of the Income Tax Act and\naccordingly is not satisfactory in accordance with the provision of 14A of the\nIncome Tax Act.\nThe Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Dhanuka & Sons Vs\nCIT (339 1TR 319), disallowance under section 14A can indeed be made. In\nDhanuka's case (supra), Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

10(34) of the Income Tax Act and accordingly is not satisfactory in accordance with the provision of 14A of the Income Tax Act. The Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Dhanuka & Sons Vs CIT (339 ITR 319), disallowance under section 14A can indeed be made. In Dhanuka's case (supra), Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

12, as well as respectfully bound by the orders of the\nHon'ble ITAT for the A.Ys 2010-11 and 2011-12, in this year also this\nground is partly allowed, meaning thereby that 10% of the overall disallowance\nremains confirmed, being treated as capital in nature, and the appellant is\nrelieved of the balance 90% of the disallowance

JERMEL'S ACCADEMY,SILIGURI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(4), , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the directions mentioned above

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed and the income of the assessee trust is assessed at Rs.3,98,75,551/-. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T Act are also initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income in the return.” Page 3 of 13 I.T.A. No.: 1652/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jermel's Accademy. 4. The total income was accordingly assessed

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

10(38) or 11 or 12) credited to the profit and loss account. 4.3 The provisions of subsection (2) & (3) of Section 14A which prescribe for estimated disallowance

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

10(38) or 11 or 12) credited to the profit and loss account. 4.3 The provisions of subsection (2) & (3) of Section 14A which prescribe for estimated disallowance

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

10(34) of the Income Tax Act and\naccordingly is not satisfactory in accordance with the provision of 14A of the\nIncome Tax Act.\nThe Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Dhanuka & Sons Vs\nCIT (339 1TR 319), disallowance under section 14A can indeed be made. In\nDhanuka's case (supra), Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

10(34) of the Income Tax Act and\naccordingly is not satisfactory in accordance with the provision of 14A of the\nIncome Tax Act.\nThe Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Dhanuka & Sons Vs\nCIT (339 1TR 319), disallowance under section 14A can indeed be made. In\nDhanuka's case (supra), Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed

THE GASPER EDUCATION SOCIETY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.871/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) The Gasper Education Society Vs Ito Ward-7 (1), Kolkata 40A, Ajc Bose Road, Nonapukur Tram Depot, Kolkata-700017 Pan No. :Aaabt 0159 K (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.03.2025 Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1074097940(1) For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Ld. Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld. Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Processed & The Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.143(3) Of The Act, Wherein The Assessing Officer Has Denied The Assessee The Benefit Of Sections 11 & 12 Of The Act On The Ground That The Return Filed By The Assessee Was U/S.139(4) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Also Confirmed The Order Of The Assessing Officer. Ld.Ar Drew Our Attention To The Circular Issued By The Cbdt In F.No.173/193/2019-Ita-

10. It is apparent from the above clarification that this amendment was introduced to exclude the category of updated returns of income u/s 139(8) of the Act. The requirement of Section 12A(1)(ba) of the Act for this year was that the return should be filed within the time allowed under that section

DCIT, MIDDLETONTON ROW vs. BISHNUPUR PUBLIC EDUCATION INSTITUTE, BISHNUPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Bishnupur Public Education Institute Dcit 10B, Middleton Row, 5 Th Floor, Gopeswarpalli, Bishnupur, Vs. Kolkata-700071, West Bengal Bankura-722122, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtb4176D Assessee By : S/Shri S.M. Surana & Sunil Surana & Dipak Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

10. It is apparent from the above clarification that this amendment was introduced to exclude the category of updated returns of income u/s 139(8) of the Act. The requirement of Section 12A(1)(ba) of the Act for this year was that the return should be filed within the time allowed under that section

MAYURAKSHI GRAMIN BANK EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND, PBGB REGIONAL, ,SURI, BIRBHUM vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 3, SURI, SURI, BIRBHUM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1159/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Mayurakshi Gramin Bank Employees Provident Fund,………………………………………Appellant Pbgb Regional, Suri Birbhum-731101, West Bengal [Pan:Aabtm2580Q] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,……...Respondent Circle-3, Suri, Aayakar Bhawan, Lalkuthipara, Suri, Birbhum-731101, W.B. Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhro Das, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 31, 2025 O R D E R

disallowed in assessment year 2013-14. The said issue came up before the ITAT for assessment year 2013-14, wherein the assesese raised alternative plea of its correct taxable income for the first time and, therefore, the matter was restored back to the file of ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer did not accept the plea of the assessee

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

section 115JB of the\nAct is a self-contained code and only the disallowances mentioned in\nthe explanation could have been made. Further, clause (f) of\nExplanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act refers to the amount or\namounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance

COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

section 115JB of the\nAct is a self-contained code and only the disallowances mentioned in\nthe explanation could have been made. Further, clause (f) of\nExplanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act refers to the amount or\namounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance

DCIT,CC-2(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. ARYAN MINING AND TRADING CORPORATION LIMITED, HIDE LANE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Am Aryan Mining & Trading Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Corporation Limited, 110, Shantipally, 4 Th Floor, P-1, Hide Lane, Johar Building, Vs. Pin-700073, West Bengal Pin-700073, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aadca7247B Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tulsian, Ar Revenue By : Shri Praveen Kishore, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

section Rule 8D of the Rules, ignoring the law that average value of investment needs to be calculated first. The ld. AR submits that ld. CIT (A) have directed the ld. AO to verify and recompute the disallowance considering all those investments which have yielded exempt income during the year and there is no infirmity in the said order