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

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

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

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

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

19,342/- in the order u/s 143(3) on the ground that they were made in cash and thus the expenses of hiring and plying of the goods vehicle are inflated and the actual income concealed. In connection the A.R. of the assessee company produced the statement showing the receipts and corresponding payments of the goods vehicle hire charges which

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

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

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

19,195 declared by the Assessee Company. 5) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in arbitrarily holding that the whole amount of consideration being sum of Rs.16,50,000 in respect of sale of two properties situated at Rajkot are liable to be taxed under the head “Capital Gains” as against the claim of the Assessee Appellant

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

section 43B of the Act itself specifically states that amounts payable under the relevant law shall be allowed as deduction only on payment basis. Hence in these facts and circumstances, the decision of the Hon’ble ITA Nos..1146, 1138/Kol/2012-C-AM 18 Apex Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau Pvt Ltd vs CIT reported

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

Appeal is dismissed

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

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

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

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

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

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

19. The counsel was emphatic that there was no obligation cast on any assessee either by any law or even by the canons of accounting practice to make any provision in the books of account in respect of the liability to pay gratuity. Consequently, an assessee might claim as deduction in his income-tax assessment the liability in respect

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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)

19. In reply to the show cause notice the assessee submitted that as per Schedule 14 to the notes to accounts, details of ‘Short term loans & advances’ are given in the audited accounts and as per audited books of accounts a sum of Rs. 46,09,34,000/- is shown as ‘share application money’. As far as advances

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

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-I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S THE HOOGHLY MILLS CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

19,97,467/- Disallowance u/s. 14A - Rs. 81,30,428/- The AO after making the aforesaid four additions determined the total income at Rs.9,35,45,050/-. These additions were deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) in first appeal. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us. 4. None appeared on behalf of the revenue. We find that

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

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

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. TEGA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80IA of the Act. 17. The assessee carried the matter in appeal. The CIT (A) held that no industrial undertaking would come into existence within the meaning of the provisions contained in section 80IA of the Act by transferring the boiler or by installing new machinery for the purpose of generation

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

In the result, the appeal of assessee dismissed

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

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

GEMINI OVERSEAS LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2012-13

section 14A r.w. 8D disallowance of ₹2,155,912/-made in assessment as upheld in lower appellate proceedings to the tune of ₹2,15,912/-. There is no dispute about the assessee having derived exempt income ITA No.1651/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Gemini Overseas Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Cir-6(1) Kol. Page 2 from dividends amounting

M/S. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2012-13 M/S Pricewaterhousecoopers V/S. Acit, Circle-2(2), Pvt.Ltd., Block-Ep, Plot-Y-14, Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, Salt Lake City, Sector-V, Chowringhee Square, Kokata-91 Kokata-69 [Pan No.Aabcp 9181 H] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-06-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 12-09-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Kolkata’S Assessment Order Dated 30.01.2017, Involving Proceedings Section 144C R.W. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. 2. The Assessee Appellant’S First Substantive Ground Raised In The Instant Appeal Challenge Correctness Of Transfer Price Adjustment Amounting To ₹345,51,562/- In Course Of Assessment As Pertaining To Its International Transactions With Its Overseas Associate Enterprise (Ae). This Assessee Is A Company Providing Consultancy Including Tax & Regulatory Services. It Filed Its Return On 30.11.2012 Stating Total Income Of ₹51,62,16,310/-. This Followed Its Revised Return Dated 31.03.2014 Reducing Its Taxable Income To ₹49,87,12,700/-. The Assessing Officer Took Up Scrutiny. He Came Across

Section G of the study on search criteria is to be seen. The asses se chooses NACE Codes (NACE (Nomenclature of Economic Activities) is the European statistical classification of economic activities. NACE groups organizations according to their business activities. Statistics produced on the basis of NACE are comparable at European level and, in general, at world level in line with

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

19 reinforcement from the decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dynavision Ltd., reported in 267 ITR 600. The AO is accordingly directed to allow deduction on actual payment basis made on or before due date for filing of the return of income after verification of payment details. This ground is accordingly decided in favour

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

19 reinforcement from the decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dynavision Ltd., reported in 267 ITR 600. The AO is accordingly directed to allow deduction on actual payment basis made on or before due date for filing of the return of income after verification of payment details. This ground is accordingly decided in favour

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

19 reinforcement from the decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dynavision Ltd., reported in 267 ITR 600. The AO is accordingly directed to allow deduction on actual payment basis made on or before due date for filing of the return of income after verification of payment details. This ground is accordingly decided in favour