KIPPY ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 3(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

disallowed in the hands of assessee by the ld. AO. 3. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) where the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed by sustaining the order passed by the ld. AO. 4. Aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal

AASHIRWAD VINCOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

section 43(5)(d) and (e) have not been applied in proper perspective on the correct factual matrix of the case. We also find that there are observations which are contrary to the conclusions drawn while passing the respective orders by the authorities below. 6. In the course of assessment, Ld. AO has proposed to treat the loss on sale

MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A read with Rule 8D. Grounds No. 3 to 5 of the Revenue’s appeal are accordingly dismissed. 9. In Grounds No. 6 to 9, the Revenue has challenged the decision of the ld. CIT(Appeals) holding that the provisions of section 115JB are not applicable in the case of the assessee

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5,41,897/- disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act towards payments made without deducting I.T.A. No.: 1711/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sikkim State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited. TDS; (ii) disallowance of claim of deduction of Rs. 10,00,000/- u/s 80G of the Act towards donation, and (iii) disallowance of claim of deduction

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. LA OPALA RG LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-12(1), KOLKATA-12(1), KOL. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Both these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055178036(1) dated 17.08.2023 and ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055181950(1) dated 17.08.2023 passed against the assessment order by DCIT, Circle- 12(1), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income

M/S. LA OPALA RG LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-12(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Both these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055178036(1) dated 17.08.2023 and ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055181950(1) dated 17.08.2023 passed against the assessment order by DCIT, Circle- 12(1), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income

DCIT/ACIT, LTU - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. UNITED BANK OF INDIA, KOLKATA

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed (ITA No

Bench: the ITAT. The grounds may be extracted for reference:

disallowance is directed to stand as such fo the purposes of section 14A of the Act. 6. The Ld. AR took us through grounds of appeals 4 to 9, which challenge the action of both the Ld. AO and the Ld. CIT(A) in applying the provision of section 115JB of the Act even when the assessee was not incorporated

UNITED BANK OF INDIA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, LTU, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed (ITA No

Bench: the ITAT. The grounds may be extracted for reference:

disallowance is directed to stand as such fo the purposes of section 14A of the Act. 6. The Ld. AR took us through grounds of appeals 4 to 9, which challenge the action of both the Ld. AO and the Ld. CIT(A) in applying the provision of section 115JB of the Act even when the assessee was not incorporated

MECLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act.

D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. This is a batch of two appeals pertaining to the same assessee for AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19. Since some of the issues are inter-connected and common to both the years, hence these appeals are being disposed of through a single order. 2. Both these appeals arise from

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: the due date of filing of return under Section 139(1) of the Act.

D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. This is a batch of two appeals pertaining to the same assessee for AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19. Since some of the issues are inter-connected and common to both the years, hence these appeals are being disposed of through a single order. 2. Both these appeals arise from

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

5. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a limited company engaged in the business of cultivation, manufacturing and sale of tea and also other beverages. Return of income for AY 2013-14 e-filed on 30.11.2013 disclosing income of Rs. 167.05 Cr approx. The return was subsequently revised

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

5. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a limited company engaged in the business of cultivation, manufacturing and sale of tea and also other beverages. Return of income for AY 2013-14 e-filed on 30.11.2013 disclosing income of Rs. 167.05 Cr approx. The return was subsequently revised

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

D. Even otherwise, Section 50C should not apply on salt of building, being a de- preciable asset forming part of block of assets At the outset, it may be noted that the Ld. AO has computed CG using SDV of building of INR 10.69 by applying the provisions of Section 50C of the Act. Since the building forms part

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

D. Even otherwise, Section 50C should not apply on salt of building, being a de- preciable asset forming part of block of assets At the outset, it may be noted that the Ld. AO has computed CG using SDV of building of INR 10.69 by applying the provisions of Section 50C of the Act. Since the building forms part

SREELEATHERS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

D. Shah, A.R., appeared on behalf of the\nassessee\nShri S.B. Chakraborty, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R., appeared on\nbehalf of the Revenue\nDate of concluding the hearing: October 14, 2025\nDate of pronouncing the order: October 30, 2025\nORDER\nPer Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ):-\nThe present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee\nagainst the order

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

5 for statistical purposes only.\"\nPage 14\nITA Nos.: 466, 622, 467, 623/KOL/2018 &\n1406, 1696, 1407, 1697/KOL/2019\nAYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15\nM/s. Coal India Ltd.\n4.2 It is submitted that based on the above judgment, it may be\ninferred that if equal treatment is accorded to the foreign exchange\ngains (i.e. offered to tax), then based