A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1, LTU, KOLKATA vs. M/S HINDUSTAN COPPER LIMITED , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon'Ble) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Hindustan Copper Ltd…………………………………………………………………………………………….………….…Appellant Tamra Bhavan 1, Ashutosh Choudhury Avenue Kolkata - 700 019 [Pan: Aaach 7409 R] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu-1, Kolkata………………………………………...……….……Respondent Assessment Year: 2012-13 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu-1, Kolkata………............................................................Appellant Vs. Hindustan Copper Ltd…………………………………………………………………………………………………….....Respondent Tamra Bhavan 1, Ashutosh Choudhury Avenue Kolkata - 700 019 [Pan: Aaach 7409 R] Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shriamol Sudhirkamat. C1T, D/R & Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 11Th, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 17Th , 2021

Section 37(1), he made a disallowance of Rs.4,48,12,000/ on the Explanation 2 to Section 37(1), he made

M/S HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, LTU-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon'Ble) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Hindustan Copper Ltd…………………………………………………………………………………………….………….…Appellant Tamra Bhavan 1, Ashutosh Choudhury Avenue Kolkata - 700 019 [Pan: Aaach 7409 R] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu-1, Kolkata………………………………………...……….……Respondent Assessment Year: 2012-13 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu-1, Kolkata………............................................................Appellant Vs. Hindustan Copper Ltd…………………………………………………………………………………………………….....Respondent Tamra Bhavan 1, Ashutosh Choudhury Avenue Kolkata - 700 019 [Pan: Aaach 7409 R] Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shriamol Sudhirkamat. C1T, D/R & Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 11Th, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 17Th , 2021

Section 37(1), he made a disallowance of Rs.4,48,12,000/ on the Explanation 2 to Section 37(1), he made

M/S JMS MINING PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P. M .Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section

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

disallowed the marked-to-market loss on the ground that it is not allowable under section 43A or section 37

M/S. PEERLESS HOSPITEX HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee( in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.737 & 738/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2013-14)

section 37(1) of the I. T. Act and consequently the same should not be disallowed. However, Ld AO rejected

M/S. PEERLESS HOSPITEX HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee( in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.737 & 738/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2013-14)

section 37(1) of the I. T. Act and consequently the same should not be disallowed. However, Ld AO rejected

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,NEW TOWN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 5(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowance on account of such expenses claimed by holding that Explanation 1 to sub-section (1) of section 37 of the Act is applicable

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,NEW TOWN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 5(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowance on account of such expenses claimed by holding that Explanation 1 to sub-section (1) of section 37 of the Act is applicable

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,NEW TOWN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 5(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowance on account of such expenses claimed by holding that Explanation 1 to sub-section (1) of section 37 of the Act is applicable

DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S FEEGRADE & COMPANY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2013-14

disallowed under Explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. The assessee explained the nature of railway punitive charges that

ACIT, CIRCLE-3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TATA METALICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all the four appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed as indicated above

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

section 14A on account of common and general expenses is required to be made to the extent of 0.5% of average value of investment as provided in the said Rule. The limited contention raised by her is that while computing such disallowance, investment which yielded dividend income during the year under consideration only should be considered. Since this contention

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

disallowed the marked-to-market loss on\nthe ground that it is not allowable under section 43A or section 37

DCIT, CC-193, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RUNGTA SONS PRIVATE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2013-14

disallowed under Explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. The assessee explained the nature of railway punitive charges that

ACIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S RUNGTA MINES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2016-17

disallowed under Explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. The assessee explained the nature of railway punitive charges that

DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S RUNGTA MINES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A No.2199/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Acit, Cc-1(3), Kolkata Vs. M/S Rungta Mines Pvt. Ltd. 8A, Express Tower, 42A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr6463N (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

disallowed by invoking the provisions of explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. Relevant portion of his order is reproduced

DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RUNGTA MINES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2013-14

disallowed under Explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. The assessee explained the nature of railway punitive charges that

D.C.I.T CIR - 10,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA 2123/Kol/13 and ITA

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

section 14A of the I.T Act, 1961.” 2. Hon’ble President, ITAT nominated Shri G.D Agarwa, Hon’ble Vice President (AZ)KZ) as Third Member. The Hon’ble Third Member vide his order dated 27.05.2011 has concurred with the findings of ld. Accountant Member by observing as under:- “7. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

disallowed the marked-to-market loss on\nthe ground that it is not allowable under section 43A or section 37