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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The appeals are partly allowed

disallowance under Section 14A, provision for mine closure expenses, interest earned on shifting and rehabilitation fund, notional lease rent, penalty charges, and CSR expenses were decided with varying outcomes for the assessee and Revenue.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "14A", "115JB", "37(1)", "43A

M/S TDK INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS INDIA PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. -11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

43A of the Act. The remaining amount of Rs. 5,11,16,904/- represented realized loss on settlement of external commercial borrowing used for purchase of capital goods from domestic market. This amount was reported for disallowance in the tax audit report in view of the provisions prevailing in the Act before the introduction of Income Computation and Disclosure Standards

M/S TDK INDIA PVT. LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S EPCOS INDIA PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

43A of the\nAct. The remaining amount of Rs.5,11,16,904/- represented realized loss on\nsettlement of external commercial borrowing used for purchase of capital goods from\ndomestic market. This amount was reported for disallowance in the tax audit report in\nview of the provisions prevailing in the Act before the introduction of Income\nComputation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD , KOLKATA

In the result all the four appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

43A of the 1948 Act lays down the terms and conditions for determining the tariff for supply of electricity. The said provision makes it clear that tariff is determined on the basis of various parameters. That apart, it is only upon granting of specific consent that a private entity could set up a power generating unit. However, such a unit

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD , KOLKATA

In the result all the four appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

43A of the 1948 Act lays down the terms and conditions for determining the tariff for supply of electricity. The said provision makes it clear that tariff is determined on the basis of various parameters. That apart, it is only upon granting of specific consent that a private entity could set up a power generating unit. However, such a unit

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD , KOLKATA

In the result all the four appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

43A of the 1948 Act lays down the terms and conditions for determining the tariff for supply of electricity. The said provision makes it clear that tariff is determined on the basis of various parameters. That apart, it is only upon granting of specific consent that a private entity could set up a power generating unit. However, such a unit

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD , KOLKATA

In the result all the four appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

43A of the 1948 Act lays down the terms and conditions for determining the tariff for supply of electricity. The said provision makes it clear that tariff is determined on the basis of various parameters. That apart, it is only upon granting of specific consent that a private entity could set up a power generating unit. However, such a unit

GRAPHITE INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 43A of the Act. Refer CIT vs. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. [1998] 231 ITR 285 (SC) & CESC Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 50 (SC). In the event, the same is not allowed, this loss shall form part of actual cost for the purpose of tax depreciation and same may accordingly be allowed.” We further find that