M/S VODAFONE EAST LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T RANGE - 7,KOL., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

disallowance of roaming charges by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194C of the Act but later gave up and proceeded to section 194I

ITO, WD-58(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ITD-ITD CEM JV (CONSORTIUM OF ITD ITD CEMENTATION), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

194I does not arise at all. Even otherwise we are in agreement with the opinion rendered by the CIT(A) in placing reliance in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (supra), assessee cannot be held in default as the recipient AAI is a Govt. Public Sector Enterprise which is stated to have offered this receipt to tax. The burden

DEBJYOTI MISHRA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-22(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 194(C) and disallowed of Rs. 87,388/- on account of Studio Hire Charges and as discussed above, the CIT-A dismissed the appeal of the Assessee for non-appearance. 6. Before us, the Ld.AR argued that the assessee submitted through reply on 05-12-2008 during the assessment proceedings stating that he did not pay more than

M/S POWER MAX (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-8, KOL., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 125/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Power Max (India) Pvt. Ltd....................................………………………….............Appellant 18A, Park Street, Stephen Court, Kolkata – 700 071. [Pan : Aabcp 9559 R] Dcit Circle 8 Kolkata..………………………………………………………….............Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 6Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 107. Appearances By: Shri A.N. Chatterjee, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit (Dr) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 05, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 15, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 18, Kolkata Dated 19.12.2016. 2. At The Time Of Hearing Before The Tribunal, The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Has Not Pressed Ground No 1 Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee. It Is Also Noted That Ground No 4 Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal In General Which Does Not Call For Specific Adjudication.

disallowance made by the AO under section 40(a)(ia) for the following reasons given in his impugned order: “I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submission of the assessee. The judgement of S.K. Tekriwal (supra) is in respect of bonafide mistake when there was some confusion regarding the nature of payments and the appropriate section

DGP STEEL STAR ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,,ASANSOL vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 194I of the Act. He, therefore, required the assessee-company to explain as to why the hire charges of Rs.8,95,334/- paid for the equipment should not be disallowed

A.C.I.T CIR - 52,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI SUDARSHAN PANJA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

disallowances. According to the AO as per the provision of section 194I of the Act the assessee ought to have

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-41(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI PURNA CHANDRA SAHOO, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2009-10

disallowance made u/s. 40(a)(ia) read with section 194I treating the amount as rental payment is hereby deleted.” The ld. CIT(A) also

HAFIJUR RAHMAN,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 397/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Hafijur Rahaman -Vs- Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan [Pan: Aempr 2275 L] (Appellant) (Respondent)

194I of the Act. The ld. AO however disregarded the contentions of the assessee and held that case falls under the ambit of section 194C of the Act and accordingly the failure of the assessee to deduct tax at source makes the expenditure disallowable

DCIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VANTAGE ADVERTISING PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2204/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit Cir 12(2) Kolkata..............................…………………………....................................Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 M/S. Vantage Advertising Pvt. Ltd....................………………………………………….Respondent C-56, First Avenue, Anna Nagar East, Chennai – 600 102 [Pan: Aabcv 1202 B] Appearances By: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit(Dr) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 04, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 18, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 12, Kolkata Dated 22.09.2014. 2. In Ground No 1, The Revenue Has Challenged The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 83,91,871/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Depreciation.

section 194I at a higher rate and since there was failure of the assessee to do so, he disallowed amount

SARDA MINES PVT. LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-05(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 867/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd...............................………………………………………………Appellant 6Th Floor, Circular Court, 8, Ajc Bose Road, Kolkata – 700017. [Pan : Aahcs 2419 R] D.C.I.T., Cir 5(2) Kolkata………………………………………………......................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 69 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Gupta, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Md. Usman, Cit Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 14, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Principal Cit – 2, Kolkata Dated 28.03.2017 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: “1. For That The Order Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -2, Kolkata (In Short ‘Cit’) Dated 28.03.2017 Is Without Jurisdiction & Illegal As None Of The Condition Precedent For Exercise Of The Power Under Section 263 Of The Act Exists And/Or Has Been Satisfied & As Such The Said Order Is Erroneous & Without Jurisdiction & Liable To Be Cancelled. 2. For That The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Was Not In Any Way Erroneous Or Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & As Such The Cit Would Not Exercise Any Power Under Section 263 Of The Act. The Cit Erred In Holding That The Order Of Assessment Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

194I of the Income Tax Act. The assessee company had claimed the sum as business expenditure. Accordingly to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, the sold expenditure is not allowable. 8 I.T.A. No. 867/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd. On the basis of the above, it appears that

SHRI HRIBU BOSE,ASANSOL vs. I.T.O, WARD-1(2), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

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

194I of the Act to the total income of the assessee. Similarly, the AO on verification of ledger found that the assessee has paid Excavator hire charges of Rs.12,57,600/- to Sri Prabal Chanda without deducting the TDS u/s. 194(I). The AO added the same to the total income of the assessee. Likewise the AO added

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INDIAN OIL PETRONAS (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am D.C.I.T, Cir­10(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Indian Oil Petronas Pvt. Ltd. Pan: Aaaci5573R (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Assessee/Revenue By : Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit, Ld. Dr Respondent/Assessee By : Shrid. S Damle, Fca, Ld.Ar सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 18/12/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/03/2019 आदेश / O R D E R

disallowance Rs.2,61,600/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act due to failure in deduction of taxes under section 194I

DCIT, CIR-12(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SELVEL MEDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue ( Ground No

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2205/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 D.C.I.T, Cirle-12(2), Vs. M/S Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata 10/1B, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata – 700 027. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs 7951 G (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee) Assessee By :Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate Revenue/Department By :Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/07/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.237/Xii/Cir-12/14-15 Dated 17.09.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 20.03.2014. 2. Revenue Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. “That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,42,76,824/- Made By The A.O. On Depreciation On Hoarding Structures.” 2. “That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,66,53,847/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Deduction U/S. 80-Ia.”

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) can only be done in case of no deduction not in short deduction of TDS. Assessee relied on ITAT judgment in the case of DCIT vs. S.K. Tekriwal and DCIT Vs. Chandabhoy & Jassobhoy. The AO did not accept the assessee`s contention. Assessee has relied on CBDT circular which states that contract for putting

ACIT, CIRCLE-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MITRA GUHA BUILDERS (INDIA) CO., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1686/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit, Circle-33, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Mitra Guha Builders (India) Co. [Pan: Aaffm 2988 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowed the hire charges in the sum of Rs 68,84,663/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for violation of provisions of section 194I

M/S S. D. GUPTA,BURDWAN vs. ACIT CIR-2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

194I of the Act. The provision of this section could be applicable when it is shown that there was hiring of machinery/vehicle for fixed rent for the financial year and the total payment to one person exceeded Rs.1,20,000/- during the year then TDS as provided under this section need to be deducted. Further, the disallowance

SAMANAWAYA,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIR-2, BWN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] Assessment Year : 2007-08

Section 194I of the Act, would not be attracted. Hence the disallowance of Rs.2,68,000/-, is hereby deleted. 7. In the result

OBEROI HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA - 700069, KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2007-08

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that during the relevant previous year Rule 8D was not applicable and the disallowance made by the AO was liable to be deleted.” 3. We come to the first issue of sec. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194I

DCIT,CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ALL INDIA TECHNOLOGIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2009-10

disallowed the said expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on the contention that such payments are in the nature of technical services and rental expenses and hence attract liability to deduct TDS u/s 194J and 194I of the Act. As per the provision laid down under Section