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

41 I.T.A. No.: 1854/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 I.T.A. No.: 1899/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Tata Global Beverages Limited. 3,12,83,015/- computed as per Rule 8D(2)(iii) while arriving at book profit under section 115JB of the Art without appreciating that provisions of subsection (2) & (3) of Section 14A which prescribes for estimated disallowance

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

41 I.T.A. No.: 1854/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 I.T.A. No.: 1899/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Tata Global Beverages Limited. 3,12,83,015/- computed as per Rule 8D(2)(iii) while arriving at book profit under section 115JB of the Art without appreciating that provisions of subsection (2) & (3) of Section 14A which prescribes for estimated disallowance

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowance under section 14A was not\ncorrect. It will be in those cases where the assessee in his return has himself\napportioned but the Assessing Officer was not accepting the said\napportionment. In that eventuality, it will have to record its satisfaction to\nthis effect. Further, while recording such a satisfaction, nature of loan taken\nby the assessee for purchasing

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

disallowance under section 14A was not\ncorrect. It will be in those cases where the assessee in his return has himself\napportioned but the Assessing Officer was not accepting the said\napportionment. In that eventuality, it will have to record its satisfaction to\nthis effect. Further, while recording such a satisfaction, nature of loan taken\nby the assessee for purchasing

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

section 115JB of the\nAct is a self-contained code and only the disallowances mentioned in\nthe explanation could have been made. Further, clause (f) of\nExplanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act refers to the amount or\namounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance

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

section 115JB of the\nAct is a self-contained code and only the disallowances mentioned in\nthe explanation could have been made. Further, clause (f) of\nExplanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act refers to the amount or\namounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which section 10\napplies. The Ld. AO has not made any disallowance

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

Section 14A to respective amounts offered by the\nassessee in its returns, ignoring the revised figures of disallowances\noffered by the assessee during the course of appeal proceedings. This\nfinding is also in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),\nparas 31 to 33 and 41

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 14A to respective amounts offered by the\nassessee in its returns, ignoring the revised figures of disallowances\noffered by the assessee during the course of appeal proceedings. This\nfinding is also in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),\nparas 31 to 33 and 41

M/S. SWAGAT TREXIM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), KOLKATA (FORMERLY D.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), KOLKATA), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1850/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 M/S. Swagat Trexim Pvt. Limited,..…………Appellant 32/7, Sahapur Colony, Kolkata-700053 [Pan:Aaecs1238F] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-3(1), Kolkata, [Formerly Dcit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata] Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Tulsian, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 21, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 11, 2024 O R D E R

disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D while computing Book Profit of the assessee under section 115JB of the Act. 7. I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. With regard to the first issue is concerned, it was the submission of the assessee that during the year, the assessee has earned dividend income

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 14A to respective amounts offered by the\nassessee in its returns, ignoring the revised figures of disallowances\noffered by the assessee during the course of appeal proceedings. This\nfinding is also in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),\nparas 31 to 33 and 41

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

section 14A of the Act confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). We notice that the impugned disallowance consists of two amounts, one is the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and other is expenditure disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) r.w.s. 14A of the Act. So far as the interest disallowance is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee

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

section 14A of the Act confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). We notice that the impugned disallowance consists of two amounts, one is the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and other is expenditure disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) r.w.s. 14A of the Act. So far as the interest disallowance is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee

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

section 14A of the Act confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). We notice that the impugned disallowance consists of two amounts, one is the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and other is expenditure disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) r.w.s. 14A of the Act. So far as the interest disallowance is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee

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

section 14A of the Act confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). We notice that the impugned disallowance consists of two amounts, one is the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and other is expenditure disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) r.w.s. 14A of the Act. So far as the interest disallowance is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee

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

Section 14A to respective amounts offered by the\nassessee in its returns, ignoring the revised figures of disallowances\noffered by the assessee during the course of appeal proceedings. This\nfinding is also in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),\nparas 31 to 33 and 41

SENBO ENGINEERING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 499/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Senbo Engineering Limited Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Circle-12(2), Kolkata 87, Lenin Sarani Kolkata - 700013 [Pan : Aadcs6138B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 28/07/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Limited Company. Income Of Rs.2,53,38,150/- Declared In The Return Filed On 07/11/2017 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. Case Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass Followed For Serving Of Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings The First Issue Dealt By The Ld. Assessing Officer Was Regarding Cessation Of Liability U/S 41 Of The Act. The Ld. Assessing Officer Noted That In The 3Cd Report, The Auditor Has Mentioned About The Application Of Section U/S 41(1) Of The Act For The Unpaid Liability Of Rs.47,19,644/-. The Ld. Assessing Officer Also Examined The Other Outstanding Liabilities & Noticed That Regarding Outstanding Credit Of Rs.1,13,76,781/-, Pertaining To Ten Parties, Assessee Failed To Provide Any Detail About The Transactions Carried Out With These Parties I.E.

Section 41(1) of I.T.A. No. 499/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Senbo Engineering Limited 7 the Act comes into play. We also note that various creditors which were standing in the balance sheet of the assessee have also been referred by its auditor to be audited u/s 41(1) of the Act and the assessee has accepted the same. Similarly

KANCHENJUNGA DISTILLERIES & LIQUORS,SOUTH SIKKIM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3(2), , GANGTOK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Kanchenjunga Distilleries & Liquors C/O Subash Agarwal & Dcit, Circle 3(2), Gangtok Associates, Advocates Siddha Sikkim, West Bengal Vs. Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aamfk3402C Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.08.2025

disallowance of Rs. 2,07,41,111/- claimed as deduction under section 80 IE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), which

RAJASTHAN INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. -5(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 267/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Rajasthan Industries Limited,…….…...……Appellant Birla Building, 11Th Floor, 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, B.B.D. Bagh, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aabcr3997B] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…....Respondent Circle-5(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) has to be restricted to only to those investments which actually yielded exempt dividend income in assessment years prior to assessment year 2022-23. He pleaded to set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities. 6. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative relied on the orders passed