NAGREEKA FOILS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 6(3), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee for AYs\n2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 are allowed

164\ntaxmann.com 376 (Calcutta)[19-06-2024] in support of the claim that\nthe amendment in section 14A of the Act is applicable prospectively and\npara 9 of the order in the case of Avantha Realty Ltd. (supra) is\nreproduced as under:\n“9. Substantial questions Nos. D & E pertain to the deletion of the\ndisallowance made under Section

NEW INDIA RETAILING & INVESTMENT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

disallowance could be made under section 14A if no exempt income was earned by assessee - Held, yes [Paras 9 and 10] [The Hon’ble High Court relied on the order in the case of IL & FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. and Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Delhi).] 3.1. Accordingly, the appellant gets relief on this point

BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 80IA of the Act with reference to the price charged from it by the State Electricity Board. In such circumstances, we hold that, when Page 17 of 59 I.T.A. Nos.: 494 & 495/Kol/2020 & I.T.A. Nos.: 2111 & 2112/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Birla Corporation Limited. it was permissible for the assessee to sell electricity to consumers and distribution licensees

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 80IA of the Act with reference to the price charged from it by the State Electricity Board. In such circumstances, we hold that, when Page 17 of 59 I.T.A. Nos.: 494 & 495/Kol/2020 & I.T.A. Nos.: 2111 & 2112/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Birla Corporation Limited. it was permissible for the assessee to sell electricity to consumers and distribution licensees

BIRLA CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-6(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 80IA of the Act with reference to the price charged from it by the State Electricity Board. In such circumstances, we hold that, when Page 17 of 59 I.T.A. Nos.: 494 & 495/Kol/2020 & I.T.A. Nos.: 2111 & 2112/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Birla Corporation Limited. it was permissible for the assessee to sell electricity to consumers and distribution licensees

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 80IA of the Act with reference to the price charged from it by the State Electricity Board. In such circumstances, we hold that, when Page 17 of 59 I.T.A. Nos.: 494 & 495/Kol/2020 & I.T.A. Nos.: 2111 & 2112/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Birla Corporation Limited. it was permissible for the assessee to sell electricity to consumers and distribution licensees

ARTLINE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 14(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

disallowance could be made under section 14A if no exempt income was earned by assessee - Held, yes [Paras 9 and 10] [The Hon’ble High Court relied on the order in the case of IL & FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. and Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Delhi).] 3.1. Accordingly, the appellant gets relief on this point

EIH LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

164 taxmann.com 376 (Cal)] In light of these case laws, the Ld. AO is directed to recompute the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act by taking into account only exempt income yielding investments. Needless to say, the disallowance already made by the assessee will need to be given credit for. 4.3 Regarding the issue of considering the disallowance

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

164 taxmann.com 376 (Cal)] In light of these case laws, the Ld. AO is directed to recompute the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act by taking into account only exempt income yielding investments. Needless to say, the disallowance already made by the assessee will need to be given credit for. 4.3 Regarding the issue of considering the disallowance

NAGREEKA FOILS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 3, , KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee for AYs

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 14A disallowance is to be considered as per Rule 8D. 3.1.3 That the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) v. Avantha Realty Ltd. [2024] 164

NAGREEKA FOILS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee for AYs

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 14A disallowance is to be considered as per Rule 8D. 3.1.3 That the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) v. Avantha Realty Ltd. [2024] 164

M/S. SALARPURIA HOMES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)

disallowance could be made under section 14A if no exempt income was earned by assessee - Held, yes [Paras 9 and 10] [The Hon’ble High Court relied on the order in the case of IL & FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. and Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Delhi).] 3.1. Accordingly, the appellant gets relief on this point

DIDU INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

164 taxmann.com 376 (Cal)] In light of these case laws, the Ld. AO is directed to recompute the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act by taking into account only exempt income yielding investments. Needless to say, the disallowance already made by the assessee will need to be given credit for. 3.3 Regarding the issue of disallowance made

M/S. RSD NATURAL RESOURCES PVT. LTD. ,2015-16 vs. DCIT,CIR-9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 794/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 M/S. Rsd Natural Resources Private Ltd.,.….Appellant C/O. M/S. Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700072 [Pan:Aagcr3203B] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…….Respondent Circle-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Room No. 5/25, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri S. Jhajharia, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: March 20, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: April 2Nd, 2024 O R D E R

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) is required to be made because the assessee did not deduct TDS as per Section 194C on these payments. The ld. Assessing Officer has accordingly made an addition of Rs.52,86,164

COMPACT AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE 3(1), , KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

164 taxmann.com 376 (Cal)] In light of these case laws, there cannot be any addition under Section 14A of the Act. Since there is, admittedly, no exempt income earned this year. 3.1 Regarding the issue of disallowance

MISRILALL MINES PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CC - XI,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

164/- 0.5% thereof comes to Rs. 60,52,006/- Total disallowance u/s. 14 read with Rule-8D Rs. 60,53,495/- 11. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the order of AO by observing as under:- “5. Ground no 2 relates to the disallowance of Rs.60,53,495/- by applying the provisions of section

ALTFORT MERCHANTS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D will not be made if no exempt income is earned. The following cases cover this issue in favour of the assessee:- (i) Williamson Financial Services Ltd. [166 taxmann.com 607 (Guwahati) (ii) Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. [448 ITR 674 (Delhi] (iii) Avantha Realty Ltd. [164

DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BENGAL AMBUJA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri A.L.Saini, Am]

section 80-IB(10)(a) of the Act is "shall", but it would not necessarily mean that in every case, it shall be taken to be mandatory requirement instead would depend upon the intent of the Legislature and not the language in which the provision is clothed. The meaning and the intent of the Legislature would be gathered