MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A read with Rule 8D. Grounds No. 3 to 5 of the Revenue’s appeal are accordingly dismissed. 9. In Grounds No. 6 to 9, the Revenue has challenged the decision of the ld. CIT(Appeals) holding that the provisions of section 115JB are not applicable in the case of the assessee

BMW INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c), conditions stated therein must exist.\"\n8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Return filed because that

DARJEELING DISTRICT CENTRAL CO.OP. BANK LTD. ,DARJEELING vs. ACIT(OSD)(TDS)WD-5(3), DARJEELING, , DARJEELING.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

C. Mondal, CA Respondent by : Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.06.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These three appeals having filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred

DARJEELING DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. ,DARJEELING vs. ACIT(OSD)(TDS),WD-5(3),DARJEELING, DARJEELING.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

C. Mondal, CA Respondent by : Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.06.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These three appeals having filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred

DARJEELING DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD. ,DARJEELING vs. ACIT, CIR-3(1),SILIGURI. , SILIGURI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

C. Mondal, CA Respondent by : Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.06.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These three appeals having filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred

BMW INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c), conditions stated therein must exist.\"\n8.\nTherefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section 271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Return filed because that

BMW INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

13. It goes without saying that for applicability of section 271(1)( c), conditions\nstated therein must exist.\"\n8. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under section\n271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that\neverything would depend upon the Return filed because that

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:

section 32(1) of the Act, is allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT, Kolkata v. Smifs Securities Limited, reported in (2012) 348 ITR 302 (SC). Ground 4(f): That further and in any event and without prejudice to the grounds taken hereinabove, the authorities below grossly erred in disallowing

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:

section 32(1) of the Act, is allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT, Kolkata v. Smifs Securities Limited, reported in (2012) 348 ITR 302 (SC). Ground 4(f): That further and in any event and without prejudice to the grounds taken hereinabove, the authorities below grossly erred in disallowing

RADHAKRISHNA AGRO PRODUCTS,BARDHAMAN vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), BURDWAN. , BURDWAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

c) taken by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. With regard to ground no. 2 in respect of disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of the Act amounting to Rs.2,65,55,000/-, we note that the allegation of the Ld. AO is that payments have been made by the assessee to the agents of the traders through bearer cheques

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

c) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) and the Assessing Officer has erred in considering that Rule 8D of the Rules as automatic and the disallowance has to be made under section 14A of the Act in all the cases. 2(a) That on the facts and circumstances of the case

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

c) of Explanation (1)\nto section 115JB of the Act, the same is liable to be added to the book\nprofit for the purpose of section 115JB of the Act. Hence, the finding of\nthe Ld. CIT(A) is confirmed and Ground No. 1 of the appeal is\ndismissed.”\n5. Ground No. 2 relates to disallowance of prior period expenses

BHARGAB ENGINEERING WORKS,HOWRAH vs. PCIT, CENTRAL KOLKATA 2, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed. Hence, such failure rendered the assessment order under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 30.03.2023 erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. The ld. PCIT has gone through the provisions of the Act and the arguments and the decision relied upon by the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Vijay Shree

ACIT, CC-2(1), KOL, KOLKATA vs. SHALIMAR HATCHERIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,......................Respondent 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, 17Th Floor, Everest House, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] - A N D - C.O. No. 13/Kol/2023 (In I.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,..................Cross Objector 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

c) The ld. Assessing Officer has erred in charging interest under section 234C of the Income Tax Act. 2.1. In rest of the grounds, i.e. Grounds No. 1 & 11, it has not raised any specific grievance. Similarly Grounds No. 3 to 6 are supporting arguments with Ground No. 2. 2.2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company

PURULIA CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. ,PURULIA vs. ACIT, CIR. 3, PURULIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

C. No.7572 of 2009 held that “Interest income from surplus fund invested in the deposit with banks and in govt. Securities” would come in the category of “income from other source” and such interest income does not qualify for deduction U/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I T. Act. 3 Purulia Central Cooperative Bank Limited It is not possible

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

c) of Explanation (1)\nto section 115JB of the Act, the same is liable to be added to the book\nprofit for the purpose of section 115JB of the Act. Hence, the finding of\nthe Ld. CIT(A) is confirmed and Ground No. 1 of the appeal is\ndismissed.\n5.\nGround No. 2 relates to disallowance of prior period expenses

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

c) of Explanation (1)\nto section 115JB of the Act, the same is liable to be added to the book\nprofit for the purpose of section 115JB of the Act. Hence, the finding of\nthe Ld. CIT(A) is confirmed and Ground No. 1 of the appeal is\ndismissed.\n5.\nGround No. 2 relates to disallowance of prior period expenses

M/S. GUNNY DEALERS LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TECH-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1373/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-13 M/S Gunny Dealers Ltd…………………....................…...……………....Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 700069. [Pan: Aabcg0019R] Vs. Ito, Tech-1, Kolkata………….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.11.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Haye Considered That The Order U/S 143(3) Was Passed By An Authority Who Lacks Jurisdiction Over The Appellant & As Such, The Said Order Is Bad In Law & Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Disallowance Of

c) M/s Subhsagar Mercantiles Pvt. Ltd. However, the assessee had replied to the aforesaid query issued by the Assessing Officer, wherein, it has been mentioned that in case of Smt. Anima Roy whatever address was available with the assessee, that was furnished before the Assessing Officer. However, in respect of other parties, the assessee came to know that they have