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

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act for the purpose of computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act we find that the issue is well-settled by the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jayshree Tea & Industries Ltd. [GA No. 1501 of 2014] wherein Hon'ble Court has held that provisions of Section

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

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act for the purpose of computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act we find that the issue is well-settled by the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jayshree Tea & Industries Ltd. [GA No. 1501 of 2014] wherein Hon'ble Court has held that provisions of Section

ACIT-6(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 44 read with Rule 5 of the First Schedule, there could not be any disallowance of the amount written off out of investments and, accordingly, the disallowance of Rs.4,22,26

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

section 14A can indeed be made. In\nDhanuka's case (supra), Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed as\nfollows: \"In the case before us, there is no dispute that part of the income of\nthe assessee from its business is from dividend which is exempt from tax\nwhereas the assessee was unable to produce any material before the\nauthorities below

COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

section 14A can indeed be made. In\nDhanuka's case (supra), Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed as\nfollows: \"In the case before us, there is no dispute that part of the income of\nthe assessee from its business is from dividend which is exempt from tax\nwhereas the assessee was unable to produce any material before the\nauthorities below

TAPAS KUMAR SARKAR,BARASAT, NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

26,24,969 under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS. Section 40(a)(ia) is a compliance provision, not penal, and must be interpreted fairly. Section 40(a)(ia) applies only to amounts "payable" and not to amounts already "paid." If payments have been made without TDS but the payee has accounted for the income, disallowance

TAPAS KUMAR SARKAR,BARASAT, NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

26,24,969 under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS. Section 40(a)(ia) is a compliance provision, not penal, and must be interpreted fairly. Section 40(a)(ia) applies only to amounts "payable" and not to amounts already "paid." If payments have been made without TDS but the payee has accounted for the income, disallowance

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

section\n250(4) of the Act, the Id CIT (A) did not conduct further inquiry to establish\nwhether expenditure is in the nature of Revenue or Capital. It is settled\nposition of law that a lot of factors would determine whether the expenditure\nis capital or revenue in nature. It is seen in the said Annexure that the\nassessee

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

section\n250(4) of the Act, the Id CIT (A) did not conduct further inquiry to establish\nwhether expenditure is in the nature of Revenue or Capital. It is settled\nposition of law that a lot of factors would determine whether the expenditure\nis capital or revenue in nature. It is seen in the said Annexure that the\nassessee

JALUIDANGA PASCHIM NASARATPUR SAMABY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LIMITED,BARDHAMAN, WEST BENGAL vs. INCOME TAX OPPFICER, WARD-1(3), BURDWAN

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

26,196.00 Add:Disallowable Expenditure under section 36 of the Income Tax Act 1961 P.F 30,546.00 Provision for Bad & Doubtful

THE BANK OF TOKYO-MITSUBISHI LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ADIT, INT. TAX., KOLKATA

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

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

26,196.00 Add:Disallowable Expenditure under section 36 of the Income Tax Act 1961 P.F 30,546.00 Provision for Bad & Doubtful

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

section\n250(4) of the Act, the Id CIT (A) did not conduct further inquiry to establish\nwhether expenditure is in the nature of Revenue or Capital. It is settled\nposition of law that a lot of factors would determine whether the expenditure\nis capital or revenue in nature. It is seen in the said Annexure that the\nassessee

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

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

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

disallowance\nmade by the Ld. AO of ₹45,43,615/- under repairs and maintenance\nwithout there being any justification of as to why such disallowance\nshould be restricted to 10% and not more or fully disallowed.\n24.1 This issue has been decided in ITA No. 1246/KOL/2019 for AY\n2012-13 in the preceding para no. 7.5 of the order

DCIT,CC-2(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. ARYAN MINING AND TRADING CORPORATION LIMITED, HIDE LANE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Am Aryan Mining & Trading Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Corporation Limited, 110, Shantipally, 4 Th Floor, P-1, Hide Lane, Johar Building, Vs. Pin-700073, West Bengal Pin-700073, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aadca7247B Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tulsian, Ar Revenue By : Shri Praveen Kishore, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

26,86,43,300/- inter alia making the disallowance of CSR expenditure amounting Rs. 46,36,000/- and disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D of the IT Rules amounting to ₹6,07,60,388/-. 04. Aggrieved by the said order assessee preferred the appeal before the ld. CIT (A), wherein the appeal of the assessee has been partly allowed