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

BENI PRASAD LAHOTI,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CC-2(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

disallowance of speculation loss of Rs.28,83,6322/- was deleted by the CIT(A). Asst. Year: 2012-13 Returned income under Rs. 1,68,765/- section 139 Returned income under Rs. 8,76,720/- section 153A Income disclosed under Rs. 7,50,000/- section 132(4) Addition under section Rs. 1,37

BENI PRASAD LAHOTI,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CC-2(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

disallowance of speculation loss of Rs.28,83,6322/- was deleted by the CIT(A). Asst. Year: 2012-13 Returned income under Rs. 1,68,765/- section 139 Returned income under Rs. 8,76,720/- section 153A Income disclosed under Rs. 7,50,000/- section 132(4) Addition under section Rs. 1,37

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 of the Income Tax Act inserted by the Finance Act, 2014, was applicable by the Finance Act, 2014, was applicable w.e.f. 01/04/2015, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the the ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of CSR expenses to the extent of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account

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 of the Income Tax Act inserted by the Finance Act, 2014, was applicable by the Finance Act, 2014, was applicable w.e.f. 01/04/2015, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the the ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of CSR expenses to the extent of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account

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

Section 37(1), failing to appreciate that the disallowance under the IRDA/Insurance Act regulations related only to the allocation of expenses and had not rendered the expenditure itself illegal or unlawful for the purpose of disallowance under the Income-tax Act. 4

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

Section 37(1), failing to appreciate that the disallowance under the IRDA/Insurance Act regulations related only to the allocation of expenses and had not rendered the expenditure itself illegal or unlawful for the purpose of disallowance under the Income-tax Act. 4

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

Section 37(1), failing to appreciate that the disallowance under the IRDA/Insurance Act regulations related only to the allocation of expenses and had not rendered the expenditure itself illegal or unlawful for the purpose of disallowance under the Income-tax Act. 4

M/S ADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RG-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1281 /Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11

disallowance of claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act for Rs.80,39,696 has been made holding that the said provisions do not apply to the case of the assessee. For the sake of convenience, the provisions of Section 80IA of the Act are reproduced below:- 80-IA. 33 [(1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes

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

section 10 applies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance of expenditure debited in the profit and loss account as prepared under the Companies Act as neither any direct expenses nor any interest has been disallowed under Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only under clause (iii) of Rule

M/S MRINALINI BIRI MANUFACTURING CO.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.85/Kol/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

disallowed in cases to which these provisions of the section apply. Sub-section (7) of section 40A was inserted by the Finance Act, 1975 with retrospective effect from 1-4-1973. It is necessary to appreciate the purpose and object intended to be achieved by this sub-section in order to arrive at the true meaning of the provision

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR-3(2), GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED, GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P (2) (d) and held that the entire interest income of Rs. 2,59,49,002/-, was taxable as Income from Other Sources under section 56, as the assessee has failed to produce any evidence to show that it has incurred any expenditure wholly and exclusively to earn such interest income.” 3.3. During

THE DCIT, CIR-3(2) GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED , GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P (2) (d) and held that the entire interest income of Rs. 2,59,49,002/-, was taxable as Income from Other Sources under section 56, as the assessee has failed to produce any evidence to show that it has incurred any expenditure wholly and exclusively to earn such interest income.” 3.3. During

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)

disallowed above expenditure in terms of Explanation to section 37(1) in view of Circular No. 5 of 2012; wherein CBDT referred to amendment to 'Indian Medical Council Regulations, 2002', brought from 10-12-2009, imposing prohibition of medical practitioner and their professional associations from taking any gift, travel facility, hospitality, cash or monetary grant from pharmaceutical and allied health

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)

disallowed above expenditure in terms of Explanation to section 37(1) in view of Circular No. 5 of 2012; wherein CBDT referred to amendment to 'Indian Medical Council Regulations, 2002', brought from 10-12-2009, imposing prohibition of medical practitioner and their professional associations from taking any gift, travel facility, hospitality, cash or monetary grant from pharmaceutical and allied health

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

4. The stand of the assessee was that these payments were not in the nature of penalty for infringement of law and were purely in the nature of compensatory charges and therefore cannot be disallowed under Explanation to 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

4. The stand of the assessee was that these payments were not in the nature of penalty for infringement of law and were purely in the nature of compensatory charges and therefore cannot be disallowed under Explanation to section 37

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

4. The stand of the assessee was that these payments were not in the nature of penalty for infringement of law and were purely in the nature of compensatory charges and therefore cannot be disallowed under Explanation to section 37