DCIT CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATURAL PRODUCTS EXPORT CORPN. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shrimahavir Singhand Shriwaseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10

disallowance, if any, made under section 14A of the Act. Therefore we are of the view that ITA No.1512/Kol/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 DCIT Cir-8, Kol. v. M/s Natural Products Export Corpn, Ltd. Page 6 there is no infirmity in the order of CIT(A). Hence we dismiss the ground of appeal of the revenue. 9. In the result, appeal

ANJALI JEWELLERS,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

disallowed amounts in the search proceedings. A search assessment under section 153A should be evidence based. Therefore, we are of the view that assessment order passed by the AO u/s 153A/143(3) dated 31.03.2016 is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and therefore, Id. Pr. CIT erred in exercising his revisional jurisdiction

JENNIFFER CHAKRAVARTY,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIR-3, SILIGURI, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue (in ITA No

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit, Circle-1, Siliguri Vs. Smt. Jennifer Chakraborty St. Michael’S School, 2Nd Mile, Sevoke Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Paribahan Nagar, Matigra, Siliguri, Pin-734010. Siliguri "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acppc 9278 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

disallowed the exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 54 of the Act, to the tune of Rs. Rs.22,87,429/-. 5. Aggrieved by the stand so taken by the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) without any success. The ld CIT(A) observed that normally the builders provisionally allotted the properties

DCIT, CIR-1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI vs. SMT JENNIFER CHAKRABORTY, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue (in ITA No

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.400/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit, Circle-1, Siliguri Vs. Smt. Jennifer Chakraborty St. Michael’S School, 2Nd Mile, Sevoke Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Paribahan Nagar, Matigra, Siliguri, Pin-734010. Siliguri "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acppc 9278 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

disallowed the exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 54 of the Act, to the tune of Rs. Rs.22,87,429/-. 5. Aggrieved by the stand so taken by the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) without any success. The ld CIT(A) observed that normally the builders provisionally allotted the properties

ABC INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Abc India Limited Dcit, Circle 11(1) 40/8, Ballygunj, Circular Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Chowringhee Kolkata, West Bengal-700019 Square, Kolkata-700069 Vs. West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacca2035J Assessee By : Shri S.K. Pransukhka, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.04.2026

disallowance of Rs 12.75,893 under section 14A. 8. The appellant crave leave to add, modify, delete any ground at on before hearing.” 3. The issue raised in ground no.1 is against the invalid notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act, which is not in accordance with the format issued by CBDT Circular No. F.NO.225/157/2017/ITA-11

ITO, WARD-36(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHREE KRISHNA DEVELOPERS, KOLKATA

disallowance of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80IB(10) by the AO on the round that the assessee was just a works contractor and not a developers, the Ld. DR has filed a note dated 17.08.2011 submitted by the AO and relied on para 6 of the said note in support of the Revenue’s case, which reads

I.T.O WD - 36(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SHREE KRISHNA DEVELOPERS, KOLKATA

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S. Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2006-07] Vs Ito, M/S. Shree Krishna Developers, Ward-36(2), 78, Bentinck Street, 5Th Floor, Kolkata. Kolkata-700001. Pan-Aaaas9791F (Appellant) (Respondent) [Assessment Year: 2007-08] Vs Ito, Shree Krishna Developers, Ward-36(2), 133, Canning Street, Kolkata. ‘Chopra House’, Kolkata-700001. Pan-Aaaas9791F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Shallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Dr Respondent By Sh.D.S.Damle, Fca Date Of Hearing 18.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2018 Order

disallowance of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80IB(10) by the AO on the round that the assessee was just a works contractor and not a developers, the Ld. DR has filed a ITA No.568/KOL/2013 & 1548/KOL/2010 [Assessment Year: 2006-07 & 2007-08] note dated 17.08.2011 submitted by the AO and relied on para 6 of the said note

PRADEEP KUMAR SONTHALIA,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-1(4), KOLKATA

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed”

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

disallowed exemption claimed by the appellant under section 54 and 54F of the Act on the ground that the flat wras booked with the builders for construction much before the date of transfer of capital assets (which resulted capital gains). 2 Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia The moot question that arises is when the appellant is eligible for exemption u/s.54

ITO,WARD-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SUR ENAMEL & STAMPING WORKS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 54EC of the Act and brought to tax long term capital gain of Rs.2,11,09,250/-. 5. Before CIT(A) the assessee contended that there was no transfer of any capital asset during the previous year relevant to A.Y.2007-08. The assessee pointed out that the sale of the land took

OBEROI BUILDINGS & INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee (Ground No

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1204/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle – 5, Kolkata Oberoi Investments Pvt. Ltd. 4, Mangoe Lane, 6Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco 2859E (Assessee) .. (Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1205/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Oberoi Buildings & Investments Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle – 5, Kolkata Pvt. Ltd. 4, Mangoe Lane, 6Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco 2860 R (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assesseeby : Shri A. K. Gupta, Fca Respondent By :Shri Kalyannath, Acit(Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/10/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee(Group Companies` Appeals), Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08, In Respect Of M/S Oberoi Investments Pvt. Ltd. Andm/S Oberoi Buildings & Investments Pvt. Ltd., Are Directed Against The Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Vi, Which Oberoi Investments Pvt. Ltd. & Oberoi Buildings & Investments Pvt. Ltd.

disallowed under section 14A on an ad-hoc basis. 5.That the assessee craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the grounds stated here-in-above either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4.Ground No. 1, 2 and 3 raised by the assessee relate to the same issue whether contribution received from

OBEROI INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIR-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee (Ground No

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1204/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle – 5, Kolkata Oberoi Investments Pvt. Ltd. 4, Mangoe Lane, 6Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco 2859E (Assessee) .. (Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1205/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Oberoi Buildings & Investments Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle – 5, Kolkata Pvt. Ltd. 4, Mangoe Lane, 6Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco 2860 R (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assesseeby : Shri A. K. Gupta, Fca Respondent By :Shri Kalyannath, Acit(Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/10/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee(Group Companies` Appeals), Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08, In Respect Of M/S Oberoi Investments Pvt. Ltd. Andm/S Oberoi Buildings & Investments Pvt. Ltd., Are Directed Against The Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Vi, Which Oberoi Investments Pvt. Ltd. & Oberoi Buildings & Investments Pvt. Ltd.

disallowed under section 14A on an ad-hoc basis. 5.That the assessee craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the grounds stated here-in-above either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4.Ground No. 1, 2 and 3 raised by the assessee relate to the same issue whether contribution received from

SHUVRO CHATTARAJ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT , BURDWAN

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2015-16

section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. Subsequently the assessee claimed exemption u/s 54EC and 54F on the basis of the fact that date of transfer of the same property as the date of registration, thus claiming and allowing the date of transfer as the date of registration was not in order for availing exemptions u/s. 54EC

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year : 2005-06

disallow a legitimate revenue expenditure and that entries in the books of accounts are not always conclusive in the matter of deciding whether a claim for deduction has to be allowed or not. The created a value for its brand “Eveready” and disclosed in the Asset side of the Balance Sheet and reduced therefrom the value of obsolete stock instead

M/S. EMAS EXPRESSWAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 267/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Emas Expressway Pvt. Ltd...............................………………………….Appellant 53A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata – 700016 [Pan : Aaace9530E] D.C.I.T, Cir 8(1)..……………………………………………………………………….Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: Shri G. Banerjee, Advocate, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P.K. Mondal, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 21, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 22, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 16, Kolkata Dated 03.12.2016 & The Solitary Issue Involved Therein Relates To The Disallowance Made By The A.O. & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) On Account Of Assessee’S Claim For Deduction Under Section 80Ia In Respect Of The Interest Written Back Amounting To Rs. 4,94,57,248/-, Insurance Claim Receipts Amounting To Rs. 15,46,936/- & Other Income Amounting To Rs. 4,808/-. 2. The Assessee In The Present Is A Company Which Is Engaged In The Business Of Development Of Construction Of Highways. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Originally Filed By It On 29.09.2008 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 8,62,32,582/-. In The Said Return, The Interest Liability Written Back Amounting To Rs.

disallowing the assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80IA in respect of interest liability written back, insurance claim receipts and other income by holding that the same did not constitute the income of the assessee derived from the business of highway development. In support of this conclusion, the Ld. CIT(A) relied on 3 I.T.A. No. 267/Kol/2016 Assessment Year

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KKALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.452/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata Vs Kkalpana Industries India Ltd. 2B, Pretoria Street, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aabck 2239 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 13.11.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070338584(1), For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Ms. Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. A Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Find That The Appeal Of The Revenue Has Been Filed Belatedly By 28 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Thus, The Delay Of 28 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

disallowed the sum of Rs.21.69 crores (Rs.26.69 cr - Rs.5 Cr) claimed by the assessee under the head Business Income in his order passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act dated 31-03-2022. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A). The grounds of appeal so taken by the assessee before the learned

MESCAB INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: the AO all the evidences qua these unsecured loans such as names, addresses, PANs, audited accounts, confirmations etc. The also AO issued letters to all the loan creditors u/s 133(6) of the Act which were all replied by the loan creditors by furnishing all the details such as copies of the ITRs, audited balance sheets, bank statements, loan confirmation etc. as called for by the AO. However, the AO, by making casual remarks about money laundering and rejecting all the evidences, treated th

53A, Tiljala Road, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700046 [PAN: AABCM6765C] …..…...…………….... Appellant vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 ……..…...…………….... Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : S.K. Pransukha, AR Department represented by : Altaf Hussain, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 25.02.2026 Date of pronouncing the order

MESCAB INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

53A, Tiljala Road, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700046 [PAN: AABCM6765C] …..…...…………….... Appellant vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 ……..…...…………….... Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : S.K. Pransukha, AR Department represented by : Altaf Hussain, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 25.02.2026 Date of pronouncing the order

M/S. MANGILALL ESTATES (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year:2012-13

53A of Transfer of Property Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that section 50C is not applicable in the case of appellant as the agreement to sell was entered into prior to introduction of section 50C in statute. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not accepting the plea of the appellant