M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

disallowed a portion of depreciation claimed (Rs.3,16,92,148/-) holding the same to be excessive. 3.2.1 Attention in this regard is invited to the provisions of Section 43

M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

disallowed a portion of depreciation claimed (Rs.3,16,92,148/-) holding the same to be excessive. 3.2.1 Attention in this regard is invited to the provisions of Section 43

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

disallowed a portion of depreciation claimed (Rs.3,16,92,148/-) holding the same to be excessive. 3.2.1 Attention in this regard is invited to the provisions of Section 43

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

disallowed a portion of depreciation claimed (Rs.3,16,92,148/-) holding the same to be excessive. 3.2.1 Attention in this regard is invited to the provisions of Section 43

SHETH COMMERCIAL CO.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-14, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1100/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act')/ was applicable to the transactions in foreign currency futures entered into by the appellant and therefore that the loss from these transactions was not in the nature of speculation loss." 7. The Tribunal decided the issue as under:- "considering the relevant provisions of the relevant Acts, discussed here

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

disallowed u/s 14A by invoking the provisions of Rule 80 in the computation of total income & CO No.30/Kol/2014 M/s. Philips Carbon Black Ltd under the normal provisions of the Act in the assessment order made u/s 143(3) can be made under clause (f) to the Explanation to section 115JB. The appellant therefore submits that the addition of Rs.80

RIDHI VINCOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 4(1) Ridhi Vincom Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, C/O M/S Salarpuriajajodia& Co. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 7, C.R. Avenue, 3 Rd Floor, Vs. 8Th Floor, Kolkata-700069, Kolkata-700072, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecr9858C Assessee By : Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

Section 43(5) of the Act. This being the position, the loss arising from derivative transaction has been incorrectly disallowed

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TEENLOK ADVISORY SERVICES PVT LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri N.V. Vasudevan

section 14A on account of expenditure incurred in relation to the exempt income at Rs.2,43,90,464/-. Accordingly, the difference of Rs.2,42,70,464/- (Rs.2,43,90,464/- minus Rs.1,20,000/-) was added by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee. 4. The disallowance

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. ADD.CIT,RANGE-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

Section 115JB and also respectfully, following the order of my Ld. Predecessor i.e. the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-VI, Kolkata's appeal No. 1014 dated 15.11.2010 of the assessment year 2007-08, it is held that since the amount charged to Profit & Loss Account by way of amortisation of premium was consistently allowed by the Assessing Officer

ACIT, CIRCLE - 5(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTHAN NATIONAL GLASS & INDUSTRIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-

43,42,300/- under the normal provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and negative Book Profit of Rs.241,53,84,240/- under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the said return, dividend income of Rs.4,31,280/- received during the year under consideration was claimed to be exempt by the assessee-company. No disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6,, KOLKATA vs. LOKNATH SARAF SECURITIES LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, to sum up ITA No

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

disallowed by him in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 13.12.2005. 6. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) challenging, inter alia, the action of the Assessing Officer in I.T.A. No. 852/KOL./2008 Assessment year: 2003-2004 Assessment

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. NARIMAN FINVEST (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and that of assessee’s CO is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

43(5) is concerned - Held, yes - Whether loss from share dealing should be allowed to be set off from profits from F & O in share transactions - Held, yes - Whether thus, before application of Explanation to section 73, aggregation of business profit or loss from these transactions is to be worked out irrespective of fact whether it is from share delivery

ITO, WARD-5(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. FORTUNE INTERFINANCE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

disallowed by the Assessing Officer in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 19.03.2013. 4. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and after considering the submissions made by the assessee as well as the material available on record

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

disallowed\nunder Rule 8D of the IT Rules and the disallowance has been made only\nunder clause (iii) of Rule 8D as per the formulae mentioned therein and\nthe same is not to be considered for the purpose of MAT and the\naddition, if any, made to the book profit on account of disallowance u/s\nPage 43\nITA

M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (I) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, R-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) on this issue and allow Ground No. 3. 41. The issue involved in Ground No. 4 of the assessee’s appeal for AY 2004-05 relates to the determination of rate of tax payable by the assesese on capital gain arising from the sale of flats

M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

disallowance u/s 14Aof the Act was made, could not said to be unsustainable in law because the course adopted by the AO while passing the order u/s 143(3) of the Act was not only permissible in law but the said course was in conformity with the view expressed by the jurisdictional high court. Accordingly the impugned order

DCIT, CIR-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GARDEN REACH SHIPBUILDERS & ENGINEERS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

43-B [main section], which stood inserted by Finance Act, 1983, with effect from 1st April, 1984, expressly commences with a non- obstante clause, the underlying object being to disallow

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L.Saini, Am

Section 43(5) of the Act. With merely such remarks, the Ld. AO disallowed loss of Rs.4,74,97,275/- holding