M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

220/-. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. AO/TPO (in pursuance to the directions of Ld. DRP) grossly erred in making an adjustment of Rs. 2,64,43,540/- to the income of the Appellant on account of corporate guarantee fee and in doing so, the Ld. AO/TPO grossly erred in: 2.1. disregarding

TECHNO ELECTRIC & ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED. ,NOIDA vs. A.O, C.C-2(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

disallowance under clause (ii) of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules...." 17. Even the Madras and Calcutta High Courts have taken similar views. 18. The Madras High Court in The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Vs. Shriram Ownership Trust, 2020 (12) TMI 736-Madras High Court has held as under:- "2.The following substantial questions of law have been framed

PEERLESS HOTELS LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-8(2), KOL, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 545/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Peerless Hotels Limited,..........................Appellant 12, J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata-700013 [Pan: Aabcp9484D] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-8(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, 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 : August 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 07, 2023

Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The ld. Assessing Officer further made reference to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Limited –vs.- CIT reported in (2018) 91 taxmann.com 154. He made a disallowance on the basis of Rule 8D(2) and worked out such disallowance at 1% by taking note of annual

ACIT, CC- 3(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HIMATSINGKA SEIDE LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalit(Ss)A No.17/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of 10/24, Kumara Krupa Road, High Vs. Income Tax, Central Circle- Grounds, Bangalore-560001. Xvi, Kolkata. (Pan: Aaach3507N) (Appellant) (Respondent) & It(Ss)A No.20/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent)

220 of 2013 which had upheld that Rule 8D(2) can be applied only in respect of investment which actually yielded dividend income during the year. Based on this observation, ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to recompute the disallowance u/s. 14A in accordance with Ruled 8D only with reference to investments which actually yielded dividend income during the year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC - 3(3),, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Seth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

HARSH COMTRADE PVT LTD,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(4), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.225/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Harsh Comtrade Private Limited, Vs Ito, Ward-5(4), Kolkata 1/A, Stuti Apartment, Near Ashok Panhouse, City Light, Surat, Gujarat Pan No. :Aabcg 8847 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Mehul Shah, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 28.12.2023, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059161646(1) For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. Shri Mehul Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Submitted That He Has Filed Written Submissions Before The Tribunal Which Has Been Placed In The Paper Book At Pages 90 To 104 Which Reads As Follows :- Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata - 'Smc' Bench In The Case Of Harsh Comtrade Pvt. Ltd Sub: Written Submission For A.Y. 2012-13 Ref: Assessee'S Appeal No. 225/Kol/2024 Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2024 May It Please To Your Honour 1. In This Case, The Case Is Re-Opened On The Basis Of Reasons For Reopening Recorded On 23.03.2018. The Same Is Reproduced

2) of section 148, the prerequisite is there should be a valid notice. Admittedly, in the case on hand, the notice was held to be not sustainable. If that be so, the Assessing Officer cannot be stated to be empowered to make a roving enquiry into other issues which according to him came to his notice during the reassessment proceedings

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

2,61,95,220 38 assessee in the computation of 13 income Suo moto disallowed by the AY 2013- 4,57,16,887 43 assessee in the computation of 14 income Suo moto disallowed by the AY 2014- 6,43,76,878 46 assessee in the computation of 15 income Total 71,73,06,600/- It is further submitted that

D.C.I.T., CC - 3(1),, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3.1, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Seth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1),, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and\nappeals of the revenue are dismissed

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Seth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded