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

KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2012-13, 2014-

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey]

disallowance under section 14A to Rs.10,00,000/-. Therefore, grounds raised by assessee's appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes." 15. Since the facts and circumstances involved in the relevant year are similar to that of AYs 2008-09 & 2009-10, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2012-13, 2014-

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey]

disallowance under section 14A to Rs.10,00,000/-. Therefore, grounds raised by assessee's appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes." 15. Since the facts and circumstances involved in the relevant year are similar to that of AYs 2008-09 & 2009-10, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue

M/S. KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2012-13, 2014-

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey]

disallowance under section 14A to Rs.10,00,000/-. Therefore, grounds raised by assessee's appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes." 15. Since the facts and circumstances involved in the relevant year are similar to that of AYs 2008-09 & 2009-10, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue

DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. KESORAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue for AYs 2012-13, 2014-

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vp (Kz) & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey]

disallowance under section 14A to Rs.10,00,000/-. Therefore, grounds raised by assessee's appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes." 15. Since the facts and circumstances involved in the relevant year are similar to that of AYs 2008-09 & 2009-10, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue

GRAPHITE INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

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

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

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act can be made if the assessee had not earned any exempt income), as the revenue has not been accepted the said decision and has preferred an SLP against the said decision. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that in view of the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2022 to Section

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

disallowance was made in the assessment year 2006-07 and in first appeal, the CIT(A) by order dated July 9, 2010 deleted the addition made by the AO. Against the said order, the revenue preferred further appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal, being ITA No. 1936 (Kol) of 2010. The said appeal has since been rejected

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

disallowance was made in the assessment year 2006-07 and in first appeal, the CIT(A) by order dated July 9, 2010 deleted the addition made by the AO. Against the said order, the revenue preferred further appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal, being ITA No. 1936 (Kol) of 2010. The said appeal has since been rejected

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

disallowance was made in the assessment year 2006-07 and in first appeal, the CIT(A) by order dated July 9, 2010 deleted the addition made by the AO. Against the said order, the revenue preferred further appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal, being ITA No. 1936 (Kol) of 2010. The said appeal has since been rejected

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

disallowance was made in the assessment year 2006-07 and in first appeal, the CIT(A) by order dated July 9, 2010 deleted the addition made by the AO. Against the said order, the revenue preferred further appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal, being ITA No. 1936 (Kol) of 2010. The said appeal has since been rejected

M/S. IMC LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

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

disallowed the said provision and added back to the book profit computed u/s.115JB of the Act. 30. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the addition made by AO by observing as under:- “In the computation of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Income-tax Act, the Assessing Officer added back the amount of Rs.24

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. I M C LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

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

disallowed the said provision and added back to the book profit computed u/s.115JB of the Act. 30. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the addition made by AO by observing as under:- “In the computation of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Income-tax Act, the Assessing Officer added back the amount of Rs.24

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. IMC LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

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

disallowed the said provision and added back to the book profit computed u/s.115JB of the Act. 30. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the addition made by AO by observing as under:- “In the computation of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Income-tax Act, the Assessing Officer added back the amount of Rs.24

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

M/S TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, DELHI AND KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Tdk India Private Limited Dcit, Circle 11(1), Kolkata Wbidc Growth Centre, Kulia Aayakar Bhawan, P-7 Kanchrapara Road, Po Ns Chowringhee Square, Sanatorium,Kalyani, Nadia, Vs. 6Th Floor, Roomno.18, Kolkata-741251, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci6950Q Assessee By : Shri Arjit Chakraborthy, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2025

193 ITR 321 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that even though the principle of res- judicata does not apply to income tax proceedings, but where fundamental aspect permeating through the different assessment years has been found as the fact one way or the other and the parties have allowed the position to be sustained by not challenging

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

193/-.” Aggrieved, now revenue as well as assessee came in appeal before Tribunal against restriction of disallowance at 1%. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We find that for the relevant AY 2007-08 Rule 8D is not applicable because the same was introduced by the I. T. (5th amendment) Rules

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

193/-.” Aggrieved, now revenue as well as assessee came in appeal before Tribunal against restriction of disallowance at 1%. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We find that for the relevant AY 2007-08 Rule 8D is not applicable because the same was introduced by the I. T. (5th amendment) Rules

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

193/-.” Aggrieved, now revenue as well as assessee came in appeal before Tribunal against restriction of disallowance at 1%. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We find that for the relevant AY 2007-08 Rule 8D is not applicable because the same was introduced by the I. T. (5th amendment) Rules