APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

disallowance made under section 14A r.w.r. 8D, for Assessment Year 2017-18 is deleted. 14. Now, we take up the issue of addition towards deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act, for the sum received by the assessee 11 I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 I.T.A. No. 117/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 I.T.A. No. 118/Kol/2023 Assessment

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

disallowance made under section 14A r.w.r. 8D, for Assessment Year 2017-18 is deleted. 14. Now, we take up the issue of addition towards deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act, for the sum received by the assessee 11 I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 I.T.A. No. 117/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 I.T.A. No. 118/Kol/2023 Assessment

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

disallowance made under section 14A r.w.r. 8D, for Assessment Year 2017-18 is deleted. 14. Now, we take up the issue of addition towards deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act, for the sum received by the assessee 11 I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 I.T.A. No. 117/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 I.T.A. No. 118/Kol/2023 Assessment

INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

251(2) of the Act on the ground that the AO has wrongly bifurcated the income into business and charitable segment thereby rejecting the exemption u/s 11 of the Act in respect of charitable income as allowed by the AO. The Ld. CIT(A) while making the enhancement relied on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case

INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

251(2) of the Act on the ground that the AO has wrongly bifurcated the income into business and charitable segment thereby rejecting the exemption u/s 11 of the Act in respect of charitable income as allowed by the AO. The Ld. CIT(A) while making the enhancement relied on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case

APEEJAY SHIPPING LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T CC - III,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

251(2). 2. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1 and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in making new addition of Rs.1,41,15,230/- with an impractical and incorrect view that no common costs are attributable to earn income from non-shipping business. 3. That on the facts

BASTUHARA SAHAYATA SAMITI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(2)(EXEMPTION),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 444/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti,……………….…Appellant 27/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Srimini Market, Kolkata-700006, West Bengal [Pan:Aaatb7422R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-1(2), (Exemption), Kolkata, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 250(6) of the Act reads as under: “250. (6) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. ” Further, sec. 251(2) read with Explanation reads as under : 251. (2) The Commissioner (Appeals)shall not enhance

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

2) of section 14A contemplates that expenditures relatable to earning of tax-free income are required to be worked out for making disallowance. In the present case, there are expenditures, but the expenditures relatable to exempt income could not be demonstrable. Ld. Assessing Officer has to take help of the formula under Rule 8D and worked out the disallowance. Therefore

UNISYS SOFTWARES AND HOLDING IND. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12

disallowance and addition under the head unexplained cash credit is not correct. 2.General: For that the appellant craves leave to adduce, modify and or alter the grounds at or before hearing. 4. During the course of appellate proceedings vide notice dated 27.01.2021, 14.08.2023, 08.09.2023, 19.10.2023 and 30.10.2023 the appellant was requested to file reply. However, no submissions were made during

M/S. VICTOR COMMERCIAL CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Victor Commercial Co. Acit, Central Circle-1(2), Ltd., Kolkata, C/O. M/S Salarpuria Jajodia & Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, Vs Co., 7, C.R., Avenue, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Kolkata - 700072 Bypass, Kolkata - 700017 (Pan: Aabcv0011C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

2 & 3 above, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to dispose the objection so filed by the appellant for reopening the impugned proceedings and the consequential order so passed u/s 147/143(3) is bad in law and it may be held accordingly. 5. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming

GIASUDDIN SHAIKH,MURSHIDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 42, MURSHIDABAD, MURSHIDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

2. That I carried on the business of Labour Contractor of NTPC, Farakka Barrage, U.P.L and other departments and I filed my return of income on 22.09.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 11,85,724.00. 3. That an appeal was preferred against the order u/s 143(3) before the Id. CIT(A), NFAC for asstt. year

WELKIN TELECOM INFRA PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowing the loss of Rs.59,58,100/- from trading in derivatives when contract notes were duly submitted evidencing the genuineness of the transactions 6. That on facts and in circumstances of the case, National Faceless Assessment Unit erred in adding arbitrary commission expenses of Rs.1,14,050/- when no such expense was actually incurred by the assessee. 7. That

PHOENIX UDYOG PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.39/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Phoenix Udyog Pvt. Ltd.……….....................................……………....Appellant 9, Vishal Market, West Mukherjee Nagar, New Delhi-110009. [Pan: Aaccp4046N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata.......…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. M. Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ankur Goyal, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 18, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.12.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (CPC) u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act on account of delayed deposit of employees’ contribution to PF/ESI i.e. after the due date as provided under the respective welfare enactments. I.T.A. No.39/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Phoenix Udyog Pvt. Ltd 3. The issue is squarely covered

MICROVIEWS INFOSYSTEMS PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., WARD-9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.642/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Microviews Infosystems Pvt. Ltd. ………...................................……Appellant 148A, Cit Road, Scheme-Vim, Kolkata-700054. [Pan: Aafcm0646L] Vs. Dcit, Circle-9(1), Kolkata….…….............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. M. Surana & Sunil Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May11, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यकसद"य"वारा/ Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.09.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (CPC) u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act on account of delayed deposit of employees’ contribution to PF/ESI i.e. after the due date as provided under the respective welfare enactments. I.T.A No.642/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2019-20 Microviews Infosystems Pvt. Ltd 3. It is to be noted that

STARPOINT VINIMAY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) WARD-1(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

2) The Learned NFAC/CIT(A) erred in confirming additions made in the assessment order by passing ex-parte order without providing sufficient opportunity of hearing and hence the order of NFAC may be set-aside. 3) The Ld NFAC/CIT(A) erred confirming the addition of Rs. 38,40,000/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 being investment

INDIA CONSTRUCTION,DIAMOND HARBOUR vs. ITO, WARD - 25(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

2) That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned A.O. was not justified disallowing a sum of Rs 4,27,58,040/- being on account of bills raised and net profit of Rs 11,88,673/- and the same is added to the income of your petitioner. 3) That on the fact and circumstances of the case

JAI MATADI ENTERPRISE,MURSHIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 42(1),, MURSHIDABAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

2. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding the disallowance of 249,86,106/-, being I.T.A. No.: 1356/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Jai Matadi Enterprise. 5% of total expenses of ₹9,97,22,125/- under various heads (Driver & Helper Salary, Lorry Running Expenses, and Spare

M/S. BANDHAN BANK LTD. (ERSTWHILE GHOSH FINANCE LTD),KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-5(1), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2016-17

disallowance and claim of deduction under various sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Along with the Tax Audit Report, GRUH had submitted audited accounts. In notes on account attached to the Balance Sheet, it has been stated that GRUH has issued / allotted equity shares to its employees and 4 M/s Bandhan Bank Limited: AY: 2016-17 directors under ESOS

GARUD CREDIT & HOLDING PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Garud Credit & Holding Pvt. Limited,.........Appellant D.J. Shah & Co., 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Aaacg9791P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 O R D E R

disallowed the expenses of Rs.1,00,750/- and assessed the income at Rs.1,17,690/-. 4. Subsequently ld. CIT called for the assessment records and noticed that the ld. Assessing Officer has not examined the transactions of share capital and share premium received by the assessee during the year and thus assumed jurisdiction under section