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

12,83,015/- computed as per Rule 8D(2)(iii) while arriving at book profit under section 115JB of the Art without appreciating that provisions of subsection (2) & (3) of Section 14A which prescribes 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

12,83,015/- computed as per Rule 8D(2)(iii) while arriving at book profit under section 115JB of the Art without appreciating that provisions of subsection (2) & (3) of Section 14A which prescribes for estimated disallowance

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

disallowance is governed as per the\nprovisions detailed in section 14A of the Income Tax Act and in Rule 8D of\nthe Income Tax Rules. The charging of Capex charges for management\nservices and offering it to tax is correct, but has no relation with the provision\nenumerated in section 14A.\"\n7.5 The Ld. AR in this regard has submitted

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

disallowance is governed as per the\nprovisions detailed in section 14A of the Income Tax Act and in Rule 8D of\nthe Income Tax Rules. The charging of Capex charges for management\nservices and offering it to tax is correct, but has no relation with the provision\nenumerated in section 14A.\"\n7.5 The Ld. AR in this regard has submitted

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

disallowance is governed as per the\nprovisions detailed in section 14A of the Income Tax Act and in Rule 8D of\nthe Income Tax Rules. The charging of Capex charges for management\nservices and offering it to tax is correct, but has no relation with the provision\nenumerated in section 14A.\"\n7.5 The Ld. AR in this regard has submitted

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

12\nITA Nos.: 466, 622, 467, 623/KOL/2018 &\n1406, 1696, 1407, 1697/KOL/2019\nAYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15\nM/s. Coal India Ltd.\nwhich is disallowed as per provision of section

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

12\nITA Nos.: 466, 622, 467, 623/KOL/2018 &\n1406, 1696, 1407, 1697/KOL/2019\nAYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15\nM/s. Coal India Ltd.\nwhich is disallowed as per provision of section

BISWANATH HOSIERY MILLS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 4(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, specifically considering investments in preference shares of M/s Lux Industries Ltd., from which the appellant had earned an exempt dividend of Rs. 3,75,000. Given that the appellant had already disallowed Rs. 5,350, the AO added the remaining Rs. 14,94,650/- in the assessment order. This is despite the fact that

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

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-

12. It is, thus, clear from the above Circular that exemption u/s 11 of the Act was available in respect of the return of income filed u/s 139 of the Act. This Circular does not mandate that the return has to be filed only within the time limit available u/s 139(1) of the Act and rather directs to rectify

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

disallowance were carried out, those may be rectified. Hence, the CBDT itself accepted the position that even returns filed u/s.139 is to be accepted. It means that it has enlarged its scope of section 139 of the Act, which includes provisions of section 139(4) also. Here provision of section 139(4) w.e.f. 01.04.2017 lays down that any person

SREELEATHERS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act can be made if\nthe assessee had not earned any exempt income), as the\nrevenue has not been accepted the said decision and has\npreferred an SLP against the said decision.\n4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that in view of\nthe amendment made by the Finance Act, 2022 to Section

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

TAPAS KUMAR SARKAR,BARASAT, NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 40(a)(ia) with effect from 01/04/2015. These contentions were examined by the Ld. CIT(A), but were not found acceptable. However, the Bench was of the view that the assessee could not make proper submission and the Ld. AR requested before the Bench that the matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) so that proper submission

TAPAS KUMAR SARKAR,BARASAT, NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 40(a)(ia) with effect from 01/04/2015. These contentions were examined by the Ld. CIT(A), but were not found acceptable. However, the Bench was of the view that the assessee could not make proper submission and the Ld. AR requested before the Bench that the matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) so that proper submission

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- V (I), KOLKATA vs. BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED, BIRLA BUILDING

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue is dismissed, as also the cross objection filed by the assessee for both the years

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

12 & 2012- 13 dealt with this issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and decided in assessee’s favour observing as follows: “15. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The sixth common ground of the department’s appeal relates to disallowance under section

ONKAR SOCIETY FOR ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGICAL ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 2, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargshri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed 5% of the capital expenditure claimed. It was stated that the assessee is a society registered under section 12AA of the Act and running an educational institution. The income derived from the trust property had to be computed on commercial principles and the assessee placed reliance on Circular No. 5-P(LXX-6) of 1968. In the case