DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ASHIANA HOUSING LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Cit-A. The Cit-A By Placing His Reliance On An Order Of Kolkata Bench (Itat, Kolkata) In The Case Of Rei Agro Ltd Reported In (2013) 144 Itd 141 (Kolkata-Trib) Directed The Ao To Verify The Details Of Investment Filed Before Him & To Compute The Expenditure Accordingly In Terms Of Investment, Which Yielded Exempt Income.

disallowance. 5. In reply, the ld. A.R. submitted that as per the provisions of section 14A(2), the AO was to determine

M/S JMS MINING PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P. M .Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

disallowed and added back in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 37(1) of the Act. In terms of Section 135(5

HINDUSTAN MOTORS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

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

5 of 10 Taxman.com.227), he confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A of the Act read

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INTEGRATED COAL MINING LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Dcit, Circle-6(1), V/S. M/S Integrated Coal P-7, Chowringhee Mining Ltd., 6, Church Square, Kolkata-69 Lane, 1Ste Floor, Kolakta-700001 [Pan No.Aaaci 5584 L] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Diparun Mukherjee, Aca & ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri Alolk Goenka, Aca 15-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

section 14A r.w.s.8D disallowance of ₹55,96,082 in relation to assessee’s exempt income from dividends amounting to ₹30.40 lac. The Assessing Officer’s assessee had admittedly disallowed a sum of ₹44,450/- on its own. The assessment order dated 08.03.2013 disallowed ½ % of average value of investments in the nature of administrative expenses coming to ₹5

DCIT, C.C.XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PRATAP PROPERTIES LTD., KOLKATA

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue for all the assessment years are dismissed

Bench: Hon. Sri Mahavir Singh & Hon. Sri M.Balaganesh

5. As pointed out above, in so far as, fresh assessment order is concerned, there was no satisfaction recorded regarding penalty proceeding under section 271E of the act, though in that order the Assessing Officer wanted penalty proceeding to be initiated under section 271(1)(c ) of the Act. Thus, in so far as penalty under section 271E is concerned

ACIT, CIRCLE-3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TATA METALICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all the four appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed as indicated above

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

5 of the revenue’s appeal and Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal for AY 2007-08, it is observed that the common issue involved therein relating to the disallowance under section

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

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

M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), 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

disallowing an amount of Rs. 5,38,000 under section 14A of the Act. 5. Erroneous disallowance of amount paid

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

section 14A could not stand. Consequently, the disallowance was not permissible. & CO No.30/Kol/2014 M/s. Philips Carbon Black Ltd 15. The Coordinate Bench in the case of Justice Sam P Bharucha vs. Addl. CIT in ITA No.3889/Mum/2011 dated 25.07.2012 has analyzed similar issue and came to the following conclusion: “5

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

Section 73 has no application in the facts of the assessee’s case. 12. The only other issue raised by the Revenue in its appeal for A.Y. 2003-04 as taken in Ground No. 5 relates to the deletion by the ld. CIT(Appeals) of the addition of Rs.22,75,185/- made by the Assessing Officer by way of disallowance

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5,53,878/-) as the assessee has suo-moto disallowed Rs.5,53,878/-. Thus, the disallowance under Rule-8D of the IT, Rule, 1962 relevant section

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5,53,878/-) as the assessee has suo-moto disallowed Rs.5,53,878/-. Thus, the disallowance under Rule-8D of the IT, Rule, 1962 relevant section

D.C.I.T CIR - 3,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S JAROLI VINCOM PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s CO is dismissed as infructous

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 88E of the Act. 18. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the disallowance made by AO by observing as under:- “Next ground nos. 4&5

D.C.I.T CIR - 3,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S JAROLI VINCOM PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s CO is dismissed as infructous

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 88E of the Act. 18. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the disallowance made by AO by observing as under:- “Next ground nos. 4&5

TATA METALIKS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

disallowance of expenses made under section 14A was held to be I.T.A No.788/Kol/2018 & I.T.A No.1143/Kol/2018 Tata Metaliks Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 unsustainable by the Tribunal holding that the provisions of section 14A could not be imported into Clause (f) of Explanation (1) to section 115JA. Respectfully following the said decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TATA METALIKS LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

disallowance of expenses made under section 14A was held to be I.T.A No.788/Kol/2018 & I.T.A No.1143/Kol/2018 Tata Metaliks Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 unsustainable by the Tribunal holding that the provisions of section 14A could not be imported into Clause (f) of Explanation (1) to section 115JA. Respectfully following the said decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal

TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

5 A.Y. 2014-2015 Tega Industries Limited 10. We are, therefore, inclined to hold that no interest disallowance of Rs.11.34 lakhs is called for as per Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Act for computing the disallowance under section