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

disallowance can be made if the expenditure or allowance debited to the profit and loss account is not admissible under the provisions of sections 30 to 43B of the Act in computing the profits and gains of a business. For the purpose of section 43B of the Act, the expenditure shall be allowed in the year in which such

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the marked-to-market loss on the ground that it is not allowable under section 43A or section 37 of the Act in view of the CBDT Instruction No. 3/2010 as per page 5 of the Assessment order which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings by his finding as under: "No.03 of the appeal

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S DEEPAK INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and CO of the assessee in A

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

section 43A of the Act comes into play. Consequently the AO disallowed Rs. 1,65,65,143/- and added to the same

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S DEEPAK INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and CO of the assessee in A

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

section 43A of the Act comes into play. Consequently the AO disallowed Rs. 1,65,65,143/- and added to the same

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the marked-to-market loss on the ground that it is not allowable under section 43A or section 37 of the Act in view of the CBDT Instruction No. 3/2010 as per page 5 of the Assessment order which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings by his finding as under: "No.03 of the appeal

M/S. DEEPAK INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

43A vide ITA Nos. 263-264/K/ 2020 [C.0. 425/K/21] [A.Ys 2014-15 & 2015-16] and AO may kindly be directed to allow such depreciation accordingly. 6. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) was wholly unjustified in holding charging of interest u/s 234C as consequential since such interest is chargeable

M/S. DEEPAK INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

43A vide ITA Nos. 263-264/K/ 2020 [C.0. 425/K/21] [A.Ys 2014-15 & 2015-16] and AO may kindly be directed to allow such depreciation accordingly. 6. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) was wholly unjustified in holding charging of interest u/s 234C as consequential since such interest is chargeable

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

disallowed the marked-to-market loss on the ground that it is not allowable under section 43A or section 37 of the Act in view of the CBDT Instruction No. 3/2010 as per page 5 of the Assessment order which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings by his finding as under: "No.03 of the appeal

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the marked-to-market loss on the ground that it is not allowable under section 43A or section 37 of the Act in view of the CBDT Instruction No. 3/2010 as per page 5 of the Assessment order which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings by his finding as under: "No.03 of the appeal

M/S VODAFONE EAST LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T RANGE - 7,KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

disallowed while arriving at the taxable income. The Learned CIT(Appeals) also stated that the assessee has also not explained that whether the said provision was allowed deprecation or similar claim in the earlier years. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 11.2. The Learned AR argued that the assessee had entered into lease agreements with owners of certain

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 5, 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 : 2007-08

disallowed in the order u/s 143(3) 5. The assessee raised ground no.13 before CIT(A) seeking to exclude from the total income, the gain on foreign exchange fluctuation on loans availed for purchase of indigenous machineries, which read as follows :- “13. That the Assessing Officer should have treated a sum of rs.5,79,10,208/- out of Rs.10

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LTD., 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 : 2007-08

disallowed in the order u/s 143(3) 5. The assessee raised ground no.13 before CIT(A) seeking to exclude from the total income, the gain on foreign exchange fluctuation on loans availed for purchase of indigenous machineries, which read as follows :- “13. That the Assessing Officer should have treated a sum of rs.5,79,10,208/- out of Rs.10

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

1 (Karnataka)], (iv) CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd., [[2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal)], (v) CIT v. Abhinitha Foundation Pvt. Ltd., [[2017] 396 ITR 251 (Mad)], (vi) CIT v. Ashok Kurien, [2016 (11) TMI 122 Bombay HC], (vii) PCIT v. Gujarat Gas Trading Co. Ltd., [2016 (6) TMI 599 Gujarat HC] (viii) CIT v. Faze Three

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 vs. M/S. KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue as well that of assessee both are dismissed

Bench: Shrip.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

1),Kol. Page 6 the material available on record, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance for the following reasons given in paragraph No.5.2 to 5.10 of his impugned order:- “5.2 I have carefully considered the action of the AO as also the reasons recorded tor such action as well as the arguments advanced by the appellant I have

KESORAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue as well that of assessee both are dismissed

Bench: Shrip.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

1),Kol. Page 6 the material available on record, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the said disallowance for the following reasons given in paragraph No.5.2 to 5.10 of his impugned order:- “5.2 I have carefully considered the action of the AO as also the reasons recorded tor such action as well as the arguments advanced by the appellant I have

D.C..I.T.,CIRCLE-5(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S SISECAM FLAT GLASS INDIA LTD. (FORMERLY HNG FLAT GLASS LTD.), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed and cross objection of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13

43A or Section 37(1) and therefore disallowed the same. The AO disallowed net sum of Rs.2,26,10,487/­ after

EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment completed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(5) taking a possible view. It appears that the ld. Principal CIT, however, overlooked this vital aspect while holding the order of the Assessing Officer on this issue as 12 A.Y. 2012-2013 Eveready