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

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S SHALIMAR WIRES INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14

disallowance of Rs.1,72,38,40S/- is deleted. This ground of appeal succeeds and is therefore, allowed.” 3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the Revenue’s instant former grievance. There is no dispute about the assessee having paid the impugned commission amount to its overseas agents without deducting TDS. The Revenue reiterates the Assessing Officer’s findings that

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

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

KATHLEEN CONFECTIONERS,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-32, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

37 NYPTTJ 165 (Jd) c) Paris Elysees India Private Limited Vs. DCIT Order dated 20.02.2023 in ITA No. 357/JPR/2022 11. The contention as canvassed by the ld. counsel is that the Assessing Officer could have disallowed the aforesaid employees’ contribution to ESI/PF being deposited after the due date under the relevant statute, only in an assessment carried

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

1) of the Act, was con- sidered and was ultimately decided that the same amounted to definite legal lia- bility, which has to be allowed as deduction, after considering the definition of "employees stock option" under section 2(15A) of the Companies Act, 1956. The new provision under section 2(37) of the Companies Act, 2013 also is in similar

SINGHANIA & SONS (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 10(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Singhania & Sons Pvt. Ltd…………...............................................................………………….............Appellant 3D, Duckback House 41, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aadcs 6078 A] Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Nfac...............................................………..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Katarua, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

37,473/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) u/s 14A by made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) u/s 14A by made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) u/s 14A by applying Clause (ii) of Rule 8D(2), the ld. Counse applying Clause

ACIT, CIR-2, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LUX INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

37. On a more fundamental note, however, it is also a settled legal position by now that the services of the nature rendered by these commission agents cannot anyway be treated as fees for technical services anyway. Viewed thus, even the discussion on whether the amounts in question could be treated as 'consideration' for technical services, may be rendered academic

ACIT, CIR-2, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LUX INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

37. On a more fundamental note, however, it is also a settled legal position by now that the services of the nature rendered by these commission agents cannot anyway be treated as fees for technical services anyway. Viewed thus, even the discussion on whether the amounts in question could be treated as 'consideration' for technical services, may be rendered academic

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

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

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

section 37(1) of the Act. Thus, on the\nfacts of the case, the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) is not correct and is\nreversed, the findings of the Ld. AO are upheld and Ground No. 1 of\nthe appeal is allowed.\n7. Ground No. 2 relates to the Ld. CIT(A) erring in giving part relief

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 37(1) of the Act. Thus, on the\nfacts of the case, the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) is not correct and is\nreversed, the findings of the Ld. AO are upheld and Ground No. 1 of\nthe appeal is allowed.\n7. Ground No. 2 relates to the Ld. CIT(A) erring in giving part relief

M/S PREMIER IRRIGATION ADRITEC (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

1) of Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Supreme Court had decided the issue in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. 7.9 From the analysis of the above cases it can be seen that there is a consensus among the Courts and it has been consistently held that interest paid u/s 201(1A) for delay

AT&S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KARNATAKA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am At&S India Private Limited Vs. Dcit, Circle 11(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 12A, Industrial Area, Nanjangud – 571 301 Kolkata – 700 069. Mysore District, Karnataka, India "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeca 2930 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

disallowance without appreciating that the Ld. AO in the draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with 144C(1) of the Act did not make any adverse comment under section 37