DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GUJRAT NRE COKE LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am ] Assessment Year : 2004-05 D.C.I.T., Circle-12, -Versus- M/S. Gujarat Nre Coke Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan: Aabcg 6225 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Respondent : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.09.2016. Order

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer has been deleted. Not being satisfied with the order of the ld CIT (A), the Revenue is in appeal before us. The grounds of appeal taken by the revenue read as follows :- “1.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per the Ld. CIT(A) erred in declaring

EVERGREEN DRUMPS & CANS PVT LTD.,HOWRAH vs. D.C.I.T CIR - I,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, A.M. & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M.)

section 143(3) of the I.T.Act. 2. The assessee raised the following grounds: “1.a) That on the facts and on the circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) was not justified in reducing the disallowance under the head Miscellaneous Expenses to Rs.1,00,000/= from Rs.4,46,975/=. (b) That the Appellant submits that there

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Vs. 129, Park Street Kolkata Kolkata-17 (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Berger Paints India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 129, Park Street Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Revenue : Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Cross Appeals By The Revenue & Assessee Are Arising Out Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-22, Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 14/Cit(A)-22/14-15/16-17/Kol Dated 31.02.2018 Against The Order Of Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act), Dated 31.12.2016 For Ay 2014-15. 2. Before Us, Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Represented The Revenue. Ld. Counsel For The Ita No. 2299/Kol/2019 By Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. Ays 2014-15 Assessee Has Placed On Record, A Brief Note On The Submissions Made Along With Paper Books & Chart Substantiate The Claims Made By The Assessee In The Assessment Year Under Appeal.

disallowing deduction u/s. 80IB of the I.T Act, 1961. The AO in his assessment order has mentioned that ‘the other income of Rs.11586000/- is from sale of scrap. It is clear that deduction u/s. 80IB/80IC is not allowable on interest income and sale of scrap because this receipts cannot be treated as profit and gains derived from business referred

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Vs. 129, Park Street Kolkata Kolkata-17 (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Berger Paints India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 129, Park Street Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Revenue : Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Cross Appeals By The Revenue & Assessee Are Arising Out Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-22, Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 14/Cit(A)-22/14-15/16-17/Kol Dated 31.02.2018 Against The Order Of Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act), Dated 31.12.2016 For Ay 2014-15. 2. Before Us, Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Represented The Revenue. Ld. Counsel For The Ita No. 2299/Kol/2019 By Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. Ays 2014-15 Assessee Has Placed On Record, A Brief Note On The Submissions Made Along With Paper Books & Chart Substantiate The Claims Made By The Assessee In The Assessment Year Under Appeal.

disallowing deduction u/s. 80IB of the I.T Act, 1961. The AO in his assessment order has mentioned that ‘the other income of Rs.11586000/- is from sale of scrap. It is clear that deduction u/s. 80IB/80IC is not allowable on interest income and sale of scrap because this receipts cannot be treated as profit and gains derived from business referred

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

disallowing deduction u/s. 80IB of the I.T Act, 1961. The AO in his assessment order has mentioned that ‘the other income of Rs.11586000/- is from sale of scrap. It is clear that deduction u/s. 80IB/80IC is not allowable on interest income and sale of scrap because this receipts cannot be treated as profit and gains derived from business referred

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

disallowing deduction u/s. 80IB of the I.T Act, 1961. The AO in his assessment order has mentioned that ‘the other income of Rs.11586000/- is from sale of scrap. It is clear that deduction u/s. 80IB/80IC is not allowable on interest income and sale of scrap because this receipts cannot be treated as profit and gains derived from business referred

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

disallowing deduction u/s. 80IB of the I.T Act, 1961. The AO in his assessment order has mentioned that ‘the other income of Rs.11586000/- is from sale of scrap. It is clear that deduction u/s. 80IB/80IC is not allowable on interest income and sale of scrap because this receipts cannot be treated as profit and gains derived from business referred

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

disallowing deduction u/s. 80IB of the I.T Act, 1961. The AO in his assessment order has mentioned that ‘the other income of Rs.11586000/- is from sale of scrap. It is clear that deduction u/s. 80IB/80IC is not allowable on interest income and sale of scrap because this receipts cannot be treated as profit and gains derived from business referred

D.C.I.T CC - XX,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TODAYS WRITTING PRODUCTS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 1773/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08

section shall be available to an Assessee for ten consecutive assessment years starting from the initial assessment year in which such deduction was allowed for the first time. Since, the Auditors had reported that initial assessment year of allowance of deduction U/s 80IB to be 1995-96, the A.O. was of the view that deduction U/s 801B could be allowed

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

section shall apply to any undertaking which executes the housing project as a works contract awarded by any person (including the Central or State Government). In view of the above, the assessee AOP is not entitled to deduction u/s 801B(10) of the IT Act 1961 on this count.” 4. For the reasons given above, the AO disallowed

M/S DEEPAK SPINNERS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-11/KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

801B in respect of the two Industrial Undertaking Units admissible to the appellant because of enhancement of the profit /income of those two units by way of disallowance of the aforesaid expenses of Rs.15,61,000/- made in assessment. The action of the Ld. CIT(A) in issuing a wrong direction was wholly unreasonable, uncalled

ACIT, CIR-47, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SHREE RAM SAW MILL, HOWRAH

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

disallowed to the assessee-firm. In view of the above discussions the AO did not find the assessee-firm was eligible for getting the deduction of Rs. 79,35,252/- under Section 80-IB of the Act as claimed in the Return. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the Tribunal decision in assessee’s own case

ITO, WD-12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S B. U. GARDENS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 598/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-12(3), Kolkata…...….…….…………...……………………………………………….……..Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square 7Th Floor Kolkata – 700 069 M/S. B.U. Gardens Pvt. Ltd.……………………………………………………………………………………......…..Respondent Anand Apartment 2 Rowland Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aaccb 2595 A]

801B(10) of the Act came into force w.e.f. 0l.04.2005 i.e. AY 2005-06 and the project was completed in FY. 2007-08, i.e. till then the project was completed and the said clause had already come into force w.e.f. AY 2005-06, thereby applicable for the assessee also. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case

AMRICON AGROVET PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Amrit Feeds Ltd. V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 158, Lenin Sarani, 2Nd 2(1), 110, Shantipally, Floor, Kolkata-13 Em By-Pass, [Pan No.Aacca 5571 D] Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 Amrit Hatcheries Ltd. V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 158, Lenin Sarani, 2Nd 2(1), 110, Shantipally, Floor, Kolkata-13 Em By-Pass, [Pan No.Aacca 5987 A] Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

801B of the Act and in that view of the matter thee AO's action of not making reference to TPO under 92C could not be held by the CIT to be erroneous. 7) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT failed to appreciate that the transactions of the appellant with the parties

AMRIT FEEDS LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Amrit Feeds Ltd. V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 158, Lenin Sarani, 2Nd 2(1), 110, Shantipally, Floor, Kolkata-13 Em By-Pass, [Pan No.Aacca 5571 D] Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 Amrit Hatcheries Ltd. V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 158, Lenin Sarani, 2Nd 2(1), 110, Shantipally, Floor, Kolkata-13 Em By-Pass, [Pan No.Aacca 5987 A] Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

801B of the Act and in that view of the matter thee AO's action of not making reference to TPO under 92C could not be held by the CIT to be erroneous. 7) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT failed to appreciate that the transactions of the appellant with the parties

AMRICON AGROVET PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Amrit Feeds Ltd. V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 158, Lenin Sarani, 2Nd 2(1), 110, Shantipally, Floor, Kolkata-13 Em By-Pass, [Pan No.Aacca 5571 D] Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 Amrit Hatcheries Ltd. V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 158, Lenin Sarani, 2Nd 2(1), 110, Shantipally, Floor, Kolkata-13 Em By-Pass, [Pan No.Aacca 5987 A] Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

801B of the Act and in that view of the matter thee AO's action of not making reference to TPO under 92C could not be held by the CIT to be erroneous. 7) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT failed to appreciate that the transactions of the appellant with the parties

AMRIT HATCHERIES PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Amrit Feeds Ltd. V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 158, Lenin Sarani, 2Nd 2(1), 110, Shantipally, Floor, Kolkata-13 Em By-Pass, [Pan No.Aacca 5571 D] Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 Amrit Hatcheries Ltd. V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 158, Lenin Sarani, 2Nd 2(1), 110, Shantipally, Floor, Kolkata-13 Em By-Pass, [Pan No.Aacca 5987 A] Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

801B of the Act and in that view of the matter thee AO's action of not making reference to TPO under 92C could not be held by the CIT to be erroneous. 7) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT failed to appreciate that the transactions of the appellant with the parties

D.C.I.T CIR - 12,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

801B has already been decided by various Courts, no addition in this matter is called for. “ 17. We find that the various Hon’ble High Courts held that scrap generated in the manufacturing activity is eligible for deduction and respectfully following the same, we hold that the Assessee is entitled to claim deduction under the provisions of the section 80IB

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S MARTIN BURN LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri Aby T.Varkey, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am ] I.T.A Nos.2169 & 2170/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 I.T.O., Ward-4(2) -Vs.- M/S. Martin Burn Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcm 9913 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, Jcit. Sr.Dr For The Respondent : Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Advocate

section the total build up area of shops and other commercial establishment should not exceed five percent of the aggregate built up area of the housing project or 2000 sq.ft whichever is less. Since in this case the built up area of shop and other commercial establishments is only 10,245 sq.ft deduction is not allowable/s 80IB and so deduction