BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

152 results for “disallowance”+ Section 155clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai954Delhi931Bangalore250Chennai249Ahmedabad175Kolkata152Jaipur117Cochin78Surat64Hyderabad64Pune60Raipur54Allahabad49Rajkot43Lucknow37Calcutta37Indore27Cuttack23Chandigarh23Nagpur17SC14Karnataka11Jodhpur11Visakhapatnam7Jabalpur7Guwahati6Telangana5Amritsar5Varanasi4Agra3Panaji3Dehradun1Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)84Section 14879Addition to Income63Section 14756Section 115J44Section 26342Disallowance42Section 14A41Section 143(2)28Deduction

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INTEGRATED COAL MINING LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 170/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Dcit, Circle-6(1), V/S. M/S Integrated Coal P-7, Chowringhee Mining Ltd., 6, Church Square, Kolkata-69 Lane, 1Ste Floor, Kolakta-700001 [Pan No.Aaaci 5584 L] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Diparun Mukherjee, Aca & ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri Alolk Goenka, Aca 15-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43B

disallowable under year and remaining for furnishing the section 43B of the outstanding as on the return of income of Income tax Act, last day of the the previous year 1961 (Rs) previous year (Rs) under section 139(1) (Rs) RE Cess PE cess Re Cess PE cess `RE cess PE cess RE cess PE cess

D.C.I.T.CC - XXVIII,KOL., KOLKATA vs. M/S BINANI INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

Showing 1–20 of 152 · Page 1 of 8

...
26
Depreciation16
Section 13215

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 144/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: S/ Shri K.V. Beswal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT, ld.DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A by an artificial method of interpretation.” ITA No.144/Kol/2013-A-AM 7 M/s. Binani Industries Ltd However, we find that the calculation of disallowance under Rule 8D(iii) made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by Ld CIT(A) is not correct In view of the fact that Assessing Officer had included the value of total investments for calculation of disallowance

M/S THAKUR PRASAD SAO & SONS (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CC - XVII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1560/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kumar ACAFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT, ld.DR
Section 14A

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the IT Rules. The Learned AO applied Rule 8D(2)(iii) being 0.5% of average value of investments and disallowed a sum of Rs. 9,89,313/- u/s 14A of the Act. It was argued by the assessee that the investments were made out of surplus fund in mutual funds

RANIGANJ CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,,RANIGANJ vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, ITA No.1983/Kol/2014 is partly allowed while ITA

ITA 1983/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Sept 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] I.T.A Nos.1983 & 1984/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Raniganj Co-Operative Bank Ltd. -Vs.- D.C.I.T., Circle-2 & Jcit Raniganj Range-2, Asansol (Pan:Aaffr 3315 J)) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri U.Dasgupta, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, Jcit.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri U.Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT.Sr.DR
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 24Section 6

155 ITR 120) and Bombay High Court in the case of Magganlal Chagganlal Pvt. Ltd. (236 ITR 456), which has expressed a similar view, that expenditure may be attributable to earning of dividend income.” 6. The CIT(A) however confirmed the order of the AO by observing that disallowance u/s.14A of the Act can be made even if there

EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 655/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 30Section 35Section 35DSection 36(1)(iv)Section 37

disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment completed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(5) taking a possible view. It appears that the ld. Principal CIT, however, overlooked this vital aspect while holding the order of the Assessing Officer on this issue as 12 A.Y. 2012-2013 Eveready

USHA MARTIN VENTURES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 847/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10 Usha Martin Ventures V/S. Dcit, Circle-6 Ltd., 24, R.N.Mukherjee Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Road, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata- Chowringhee Squre, 700 001 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No.Aaacu 3843 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 48Section 50(2)

Section 14A read with rule 8D has prescribed computation for such disallowance any other approximation is not acceptable. Moreover, the assessee has also given an another complex calculation on a number of basis viz loan found used on closing balance basis as on 31.03.09, Loan found used on average basis as on 31.03.09 and on direct loan used for investment

BARODA AGENTS & TRADING CO.(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 437/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 437/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Baroda Agents & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner Of Birla Building Vs Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata 4Th Floor 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaacb1472G] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca Revenue By : Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/07/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 08/03/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Four Grounds Of Appeal, But They All Relate To The Addition Made Under Section 14A Of The Act At Rs.23,46,339/-. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company Engaged In Agency Business, Trading, Finance & Investment Activities. Nil Income Declared In The Return Filed On 29/09/2009. Case Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass Followed By Issuance Of Notice U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. So Far As The Issue Under Consideration Before Us Is Concerned, We Notice That The Assessee Has Earned Exempt Income Of Rs.1,25,17,598/-. The Assessee Has 2

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, JCIT, Sr. D/R
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

155/- incurred during the year thereby disallowing Rs.23,46,339/- [Rs.25,52,000/- (-) Rs,2,05,661/-]. 5.1. We notice that the assessee has provided a computation calculating the disallowance at Rs.2,05,661/- suo moto offered under section

DCIT,CIRCLE-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INTEGRATED COAL MINING LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1138/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri J.P Khaitan, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

155 ITR 120 (SC) – larger bench decision as below:- “To perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify the same is the compulsion of judicial conscience.” In the facts of the instant case, the assessee had commenced its operations from Asst Year 2003-04 and in the very first year, this issue was taken up for disallowance and the same

M/S MRINALINI BIRI MANUFACTURING CO.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 85/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.85/Kol/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(v)Section 37(1)Section 40

disallowed in cases to which these provisions of the section apply. Sub-section (7) of section 40A was inserted by the Finance Act, 1975 with retrospective effect from 1-4-1973. It is necessary to appreciate the purpose and object intended to be achieved by this sub-section in order to arrive at the true meaning of the provision

DCIT,CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S DALMIA SECURITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee ( in ITA no

ITA 2078/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1937/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dalmia Securities (P) Ltd. Vs. D.C.I.T, Cir-12, Kolkata Ideal Plaza, 4Th Floor, 11/1 Sarat Bose Aayakarbhawan, P-7, Rood, Kolkata – 700 069. Chowrighee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcd1813G (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2078/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 D.C.I.T, Cir-12, Kolkata Vs. Dalmia Securities (P) Ltd. Aayakarbhawan, P-7, Ideal Plaza, 4Th Floor, 11/1 Chowrighee Square, Kolkata – Sarat Bose Rood, Kolkata – 700 069. 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcd 1813 G (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee) िनधा"रतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Asim Choudhury, Advocate राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By :Shri Sallongyaden, Acit, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16/08/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 31/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata In Appeal No.499/Cit(A)-18/11-12/Cir- 12(1)/Kol, Dated 08.08.2016, Which Is Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961,(Herein After Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 21.02.2014. 2. These Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Respectively Relate To The Same Assessee, Same Assessment Year, Identical

For Appellant: Shri Asim Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri SallongYaden, ACIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A Rs.50,89,392/- Therefore, a sum of Rs.50,89,392/- was disallowed by AO, as expenses incurred for earning exempt income. Assesseecompany has already disallowed Rs.30321/- u/s.14A read with Rule 8D (2) (i). Accordingly, difference amount of Rs.50,59,071/- [(50,89,392/-) – (30,321/-)] was added back to total income of the assessee. 5 Dalmia Securities

DALMIA SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee ( in ITA no

ITA 1937/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1937/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dalmia Securities (P) Ltd. Vs. D.C.I.T, Cir-12, Kolkata Ideal Plaza, 4Th Floor, 11/1 Sarat Bose Aayakarbhawan, P-7, Rood, Kolkata – 700 069. Chowrighee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcd1813G (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2078/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 D.C.I.T, Cir-12, Kolkata Vs. Dalmia Securities (P) Ltd. Aayakarbhawan, P-7, Ideal Plaza, 4Th Floor, 11/1 Chowrighee Square, Kolkata – Sarat Bose Rood, Kolkata – 700 069. 700 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcd 1813 G (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee) िनधा"रतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Asim Choudhury, Advocate राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By :Shri Sallongyaden, Acit, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16/08/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 31/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata In Appeal No.499/Cit(A)-18/11-12/Cir- 12(1)/Kol, Dated 08.08.2016, Which Is Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961,(Herein After Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 21.02.2014. 2. These Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Respectively Relate To The Same Assessee, Same Assessment Year, Identical

For Appellant: Shri Asim Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri SallongYaden, ACIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 14A Rs.50,89,392/- Therefore, a sum of Rs.50,89,392/- was disallowed by AO, as expenses incurred for earning exempt income. Assesseecompany has already disallowed Rs.30321/- u/s.14A read with Rule 8D (2) (i). Accordingly, difference amount of Rs.50,59,071/- [(50,89,392/-) – (30,321/-)] was added back to total income of the assessee. 5 Dalmia Securities

SALES EMPORIUM (SOUTH),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-26, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes subject to directions contained hereinabove

ITA 2262/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2262/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2010-11 Sales Emporium (South) -Vs- Dcit, Circle-53/Now 26, Kolkata [Pan: Aawfs 6903 J ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri V.N. Datta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowance of partners remuneration in the hands of the firm for whatever reason, would automatically result in removal of the same from the hands of the partners in their individual assessments. We find that this is specifically provided in section 155

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 462/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35(1)(i)Section 43BSection 56(2)(x)Section 80J

155 TTJ 294). 9 Britannia Industries Limited b) The second proposition argued by the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the provisions of section 56(2)(x) of the Act are not applicable to leasehold rights held in land and building at Ranjangaon, which were acquired in F.Y. 2016-17 relevant to A.Y. 2017-18, when the provisions

DCIT, CIR-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MARUTI FREIGHT MOVERS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 482/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh, I.T.A. No. 482/Kol/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10

Section 250Section 40A(3)Section 43B

section 40A(3) of the Act is to check evasion of tax and the flow of unaccounted money. But in cases where the authorities are satisfied about the genuineness of the transaction and the identity of the payee, 11 I.T.A. No. 482/Kol/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10 M/s. Maruti Freight Movers Ltd. there would be no occasion to disallow such kind

DCIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1267/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri Md. Usman, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Senior Counsel
Section 143(3)

155 and 155D in Paper book. Mr. Khaitan thereafter comes to quantification aspect of the impugned disallowance. He cites this tribunal’s decision in REI Agro Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2013] 144 ITD 141 as confirmed in hon’ble jurisdictional high court holding that only dividend income yielding investments are to be taken for consideration than all tax free investments

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RG-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 685/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri Md. Usman, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Senior Counsel
Section 143(3)

155 and 155D in Paper book. Mr. Khaitan thereafter comes to quantification aspect of the impugned disallowance. He cites this tribunal’s decision in REI Agro Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2013] 144 ITD 141 as confirmed in hon’ble jurisdictional high court holding that only dividend income yielding investments are to be taken for consideration than all tax free investments

ACIT, CC-3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SNOWTEX INVESTMENT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1799/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) Asstt. Year : 2012-13 A.C.I.T, Cc-3(2), Kolkata Vs M/S. Snowtex Investment Ltd. Pan: Aaecs 0334C (Assessee/Department) (Respondent/Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Sr. Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In view of the above we confirm the order of ld CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.3,59,52,944/-. 27. Ground No. 9 raised by the Revenue relates to deletion of disallowance of Rs.30,68,635/- made by AO on account of sale promotion expenses. 28. Brief

DCIT,CIRCLE-15(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S L.G.W. LIMITED, NORTH 24 PARGANAS

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1786/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Dcit, Circle-15(2), V/S. M/S L.G.W. Ltd., 10, Shantipally, Em Vill. Narayanpur, P.O. Bypass, Aayakar Rajarhat, Gopalpur, 24- Bhawan, Poorva, 6Th Parganas (North), West Floor, R.No.615, Bengal-700136 Kolkata-700 107 [Pan No.Aaacl 4670 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit- अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Dr Shri A.K. Tibrerwal, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2016, Passed In Case No.47/Cit(A)-5/Cir.14(1)/15-16, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S First Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Reversing Assessment Findings Disallowing The Taxpayer’S Commission Payments Made To Foreign Export Agents Amounting To ₹257,60,898/- For Non Deduction Of Tds U/S 40(A)(I) As Follows:- “1. Commission To Foreign Agents - Rs.2,57,60,898/- The Ao Has Added Sum Of Rs.2,57,60,898/- By Holding That The Said Amounts Were Paid To Foreign Agents Without Deduction Of Tds U/S.195. The Addition Has Been Made U/S

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

section 195 of the Act on the amounts of Commission allegedly paid to its foreign agents. Before going into the merits of the said disallowance, the appellant submits that the aforesaid sum of Rs.2,57,60,898 included an aggregate sum of Rs.36,30,643 paid to the Indian agents and on such payment of commission tax was duly deducted

D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INTEGRATED COAL MINING LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1758/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

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

Section 14ASection 43B

155 ITR 120 (SC) – larger bench decision as below:- “To perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify the same is the compulsion of judicial conscience.” In the facts of the instant case, the assessee had commenced its operations from Asst Year 2003-04 and in the very first year, this issue was taken up for disallowance and the same

ADI NARAYAN GUPTA,CUTTACK vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee dismissed

ITA 35/KOL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Adi Narayan Gupta Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. (Pan:Aaspg3101C) Income Tax, Central Circle- 4(2), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Subhash Agarwal & Siddharth Agarwal, Advocates Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.06.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-21 Appeal No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2021- 22/1037822452(1) Dated 15.12.2021 For A.Y. 2014-15 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S.154 R.W.S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Acit, Central Circle-4(2), Dated 10.03.2017. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under: “1. For That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac On 15-12-2021 Against The Appeal No.Cit(A), Kolkata-21/11201/2016-17 Is Unwarranted, Arbitrary, Invalid & Bad-In-Law, In So Far As They Are Against The Interest Of The Appellant Company. 2. For That The Ld. Commissioner Appeals Erred In Law As Well As In Facts Of The Case By Confirming/Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Additions/Disallowances Made By Ld. Acit Central Circle 4(2), Kolkata, Amounting To Rs.19,50,828/-, Claimed By The Assessee As Expenses On Account Of Interest Paid To Various Loan Creditors. 3. For That The Ld. Commissioner Appeals Erred In Law As Well As In Facts Of The Case By Confirming The Disallowances Of Rs.19,50,828/- Disallowed By Ld. Acit Central Circle 4(2)/Kolkata On The Ground That The Nexus Between

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Agarwal & Siddharth AgarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 57

disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. He further noted that in the course of assessment, assessee had never claimed or never substantiated any relation between the interest expenses incurred and the interest income earned. Accordingly, Ld. AO held that there is no 3 Adi Narayan Gupta A.Y. 2014-15 mistake apparent from record and disposed