AWAS DEVCON PVT. LTD. ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-14(4), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

disallowed u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court held that rule 6DD(j) is not exhaustive of the circumstances in which the proviso to section 40A(3) is applicable and it only illustrative. The Hon'ble High Court refers to the decision of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Smt. Harshila Chordia (supra

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

2 of the appeal is dismissed.\n18. Ground No. 3 relates to the Ld. CIT(A) erring in restricting the\naddition of ₹51,48,540/- being expenses incurred on exempt income,\nwhile computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act and directing the Ld.\nAO to restrict the addition in terms of clause (f) contained in the\nExplanation

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

2 of the appeal is dismissed.\n18. Ground No. 3 relates to the Ld. CIT(A) erring in restricting the\naddition of ₹51,48,540/- being expenses incurred on exempt income,\nwhile computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act and directing the Ld.\nAO to restrict the addition in terms of clause (f) contained in the\nExplanation

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

2 of the appeal is dismissed.\n18. Ground No. 3 relates to the Ld. CIT(A) erring in restricting the\naddition of ₹51,48,540/- being expenses incurred on exempt income,\nwhile computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act and directing the Ld.\nAO to restrict the addition in terms of clause (f) contained in the\nExplanation

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

2 relates to the Ld. CIT(A) erring in giving part relief\nto the extent of ₹40,89,253/-, being 90% of the actual 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

SPML HCIL JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(4), KOL, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 441, 442 & 443/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-2013, 2013-14 & 2014-2015 Spml Hcil Jv,.......................................Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, 22, Camac Street, Kolkata-700016 [Pan: Aadas1471P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-33(4), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 13, 2023

2. Though the assessee has taken six grounds of appeal, but in brief its grievances revolve around two-folds, namely- (a) Whether disallowances of Rs.39,94,111/-, Rs.23,86,420/- and Rs.18,40,168/-made with the help of section 40A

SPML HCIL JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(4), KOL, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 441, 442 & 443/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-2013, 2013-14 & 2014-2015 Spml Hcil Jv,.......................................Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, 22, Camac Street, Kolkata-700016 [Pan: Aadas1471P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-33(4), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 13, 2023

2. Though the assessee has taken six grounds of appeal, but in brief its grievances revolve around two-folds, namely- (a) Whether disallowances of Rs.39,94,111/-, Rs.23,86,420/- and Rs.18,40,168/-made with the help of section 40A

SPML HCIL JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(4), KOL, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 441, 442 & 443/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-2013, 2013-14 & 2014-2015 Spml Hcil Jv,.......................................Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, 22, Camac Street, Kolkata-700016 [Pan: Aadas1471P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-33(4), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 13, 2023

2. Though the assessee has taken six grounds of appeal, but in brief its grievances revolve around two-folds, namely- (a) Whether disallowances of Rs.39,94,111/-, Rs.23,86,420/- and Rs.18,40,168/-made with the help of section 40A

RADHAKRISHNA AGRO PRODUCTS,BARDHAMAN vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), BURDWAN. , BURDWAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is warranted as made by Ld. AO by applying provisions of section 40A(3) on the procurement of paddy. Accordingly, ground no. 2

SRIMANTA KUMAR SHIT,PURBA MEDINAPORE vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 27(2), HALDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1911/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Srimanta Kumar Shit,………………...…………Appellant Rangamalaput, Junput-Contai, Purba Medinapore-721450, West Bengal [Pan:Bffps3635Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax..…Respondent Circle-27(2), Haldia, Basudebpur, Talpukur, Khanjan Chak, Haldia, Midnapore-721101, W.B. Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 22, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 19, 2024 O R D E R

40A(2)(b), unsecured loans from persons who have not filed their return of income and loss from currency fluctuations. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) on assessee and thereafter, passed assessment under section 143(3) wherein he rejected set-off and carry forward of loss and made additions in income of assessee. On appeal, the Commissioner

M/S. GUNNY DEALERS LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TECH-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1373/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-13 M/S Gunny Dealers Ltd…………………....................…...……………....Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 700069. [Pan: Aabcg0019R] Vs. Ito, Tech-1, Kolkata………….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2024 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 28.11.2023 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 Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Haye Considered That The Order U/S 143(3) Was Passed By An Authority Who Lacks Jurisdiction Over The Appellant & As Such, The Said Order Is Bad In Law & Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Disallowance Of

disallowance under sub-section (3) of section 40A shall be made and no payment shall be deemed to be the profits and gains of business or profession under sub-section (3A) of section 40A where a payment or aggregate of payments made to a person in a day, otherwise than by an account payee cheque drawn on a bank

NARAYAN CHANDRA JANA,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ITO, WARD - 27(3), HALDIA, HALDIA

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

2 is allowed. 8. Ground nos. 3 and 4 are in respect of confirmation of addition of Rs.27,30,994/- by Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of payment made to Khadim India Ltd. by invoking the provision of sections 40A sub- section (3) of the Act. 9. Facts in brief are that the assessee

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowed u/s 43B of the Act in the immediately preceding assessment year 2008-09 and claimed accordingly which was not allowable in terms of section 43B of the Act. According to the AO, these contributions to pension fund were not allowable to the assessee in the current financial year on the ground that these were not paid before

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowed u/s 43B of the Act in the immediately preceding assessment year 2008-09 and claimed accordingly which was not allowable in terms of section 43B of the Act. According to the AO, these contributions to pension fund were not allowable to the assessee in the current financial year on the ground that these were not paid before

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowed u/s 43B of the Act in the immediately preceding assessment year 2008-09 and claimed accordingly which was not allowable in terms of section 43B of the Act. According to the AO, these contributions to pension fund were not allowable to the assessee in the current financial year on the ground that these were not paid before

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowed u/s 43B of the Act in the immediately preceding assessment year 2008-09 and claimed accordingly which was not allowable in terms of section 43B of the Act. According to the AO, these contributions to pension fund were not allowable to the assessee in the current financial year on the ground that these were not paid before

IMC LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

disallowance on all the limbs of Rule 8D, then, he could have issued a notice for enhancement of income by exercising his appellate power. Therefore, this issue ought to have not been taken up in 263 proceeding. The order of ld. Pr. CIT is not sustainable on the first-fold of reasoning given

ALISHAN STEELS (P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 115BBE(2) are effective from 01.04.2017. We also note that CBDT in its circular referred above has categorically allowed to claim the set off of loss against the income determined u/s. 115BBE after AY 2016-17. In the present case before us, the year under consideration is AY 2011-12 and 2015-16 in which the claim