D.C.I.T CIR - 5,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KESORAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

ii) of the Rules. 12. We further direct that after re-working the gross disallowance of Rule 8D in terms of the discussion and direction given above, the A.O. shall reduce the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- already suo-moto disallowed by the assessee under section 14A and the net sum so computed alone shall be added back

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

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

ii) of the Rules. 12. We further direct that after re-working the gross disallowance of Rule 8D in terms of the discussion and direction given above, the A.O. shall reduce the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- already suo-moto disallowed by the assessee under section 14A and the net sum so computed alone shall be added back

KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

ii) of the Rules. 12. We further direct that after re-working the gross disallowance of Rule 8D in terms of the discussion and direction given above, the A.O. shall reduce the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- already suo-moto disallowed by the assessee under section 14A and the net sum so computed alone shall be added back

ACIT, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KESORAM INDUSTRIES. LTD, KOLKATA

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

ii) of the Rules. 12. We further direct that after re-working the gross disallowance of Rule 8D in terms of the discussion and direction given above, the A.O. shall reduce the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- already suo-moto disallowed by the assessee under section 14A and the net sum so computed alone shall be added back

KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADD.CIT,RANGE-5,, KOLKATA

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

ii) of the Rules. 12. We further direct that after re-working the gross disallowance of Rule 8D in terms of the discussion and direction given above, the A.O. shall reduce the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- already suo-moto disallowed by the assessee under section 14A and the net sum so computed alone shall be added back

ITO, WD-33(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX SUBHASH JV, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Us The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee Submits That The Issue In Hand Regarding Claim Of Deduction U/S. 80Ia Of The Act Is Covered By The Consolidated Order Dt:18-06-2013 Of The Kolkata Tribunal, ‘B‘ Bench, Kolkata In Assessee’S Own Case In Ita No. 1684/Kol/2011 & Ita No. 1685/Kol/2011 For The A.Y 2007-08. The Ld. Ar Also Submits That The 1 M/S. Simplex Subhash J.V

disallowed and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 7. The assessee challenged the same before the CIT-A. The CIT-A after considering the consolidated order in assessee’s own case supra for the A.Y 2008-09 of the Kolkata Tribunal and his earlier order for the A.Y 2009-10 directed the AO to allow deduction

SIMPLEX KRITA JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Simplex Krita Jv Ito, Ward-33(1), Kolkata Simplex House, 27, Shakespeare Vs Sarani, Kolkata-700017. Pan: Aalas 5699 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal In Ita No. 181/Kol/2023 For A.Y. 2016-17 Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Ld. Cit In Short], Dated 25.01.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

disallowance of deduction of Rs.29,67,937/- u/s 80-IA(4) of the Act without considering that the activities of the appellant-JV were outside the purview of the Explanation below sec. 80-IA(13) of the Act and that the conditions for claiming deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act have been fully satisfied by the appellant

ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX MEINHARDT JOINT VENTURE, KOLKATA

In the result, both the above appeals of revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

3. At the time of hearing before us the ld.AR of the assessee submits that both the issues in hand are covered by the earlier order dt. 18-06-2013 of the Kolkata Tribunal, ‘B‘ Bench, Kolkata in assessee’s own case for the A.Y 2007- 08 in ITA No. 1684/Kol/2011 and copy of the same is on record, wherein

ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS JV, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

3. At the time of hearing before us the ld.AR of the assessee submits that the issue in hand is covered by the earlier order dt. 18-06-2013 of the Kolkata Tribunal, ‘B‘ Bench, Kolkata in assessee’s own case for the A.Y 2007-08 in ITA No. 1684/Kol/2011 and copy of the same is placed on record, wherein

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRAPHITE INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, considering the discussions made above, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

801A after adjusting entire interest by applying provision u/s. 80IA(10) whereas on fact the said interest is relatable to both normal income and income eligible u/s. 80IA of the Act. 7. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim of the assessee u/s. 80IA ignoring

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- V (I), KOLKATA vs. BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED, BIRLA BUILDING

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue is dismissed, as also the cross objection filed by the assessee for both the years

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

ii) An amount of Rs. 69,53,754/- was added back as capital expenditure, instead of Revenue expenditure claimed, on account of rent/compensation paid in connection with mining activity. (iii) The Ld. AO disallowed an amount of Rs. 6,82,71,486/- in addition to Rs. 11,11,114/- already disallowed by the assessee for earning exempt income. This addition

M/S BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL./JOINT/DY./ASSTT. COMMISSIONER/ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

section 801A(4)(i) by observing that there is no condition to transfer the infrastructural facility to the GoAP or Specified Authority without considering the fact that this condition has been deleted by the Finance Act, 2001. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP erred in affirming the action

M/S BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-9(1), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

section 801A(4)(i) by observing that there is no condition to transfer the infrastructural facility to the GoAP or Specified Authority without considering the fact that this condition has been deleted by the Finance Act, 2001. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP erred in affirming the action

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INFRASTRACTURE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

ii) operative & maintaining, or (iii) developing, operative and maintaining any infrastructure facility, the assessee shall M/s. ABCI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., AY 2003-04 & 2004-05 be entitled to claim deduction u/s. 80IA of an amount equal to hundred percent of the profits end gains derived from such business. However, such deduction shall not be allowed if the undertaking was formed

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INTRASTRACTURE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

ii) operative & maintaining, or (iii) developing, operative and maintaining any infrastructure facility, the assessee shall M/s. ABCI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., AY 2003-04 & 2004-05 be entitled to claim deduction u/s. 80IA of an amount equal to hundred percent of the profits end gains derived from such business. However, such deduction shall not be allowed if the undertaking was formed

M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80-IA of the Act 5.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, The Ld. AO and Hon'ble DRP erred in not granting the deduction claimed by the Assessee under section 80-IA of the Act amounting to Rs. 4,88,57,264 on the contention

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

3) making adjustment on account of transfer of power to its own undertaking that is captively consumed by other undertakings of the assessee company on the basis of rate charged by generating companies for supply of power to the distribution company. During the instant assessment year, the captive consumption of power was 14,04,31,492 units. The assessee

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

3) making adjustment on account of transfer of power to its own undertaking that is captively consumed by other undertakings of the assessee company on the basis of rate charged by generating companies for supply of power to the distribution company. During the instant assessment year, the captive consumption of power was 14,04,31,492 units. The assessee