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

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

section 115JB of the Act to ₹4,19,505/-.\n18.1 This issue has been decided in ITA No. 1246/KOL/2019 for AY\n2012-13 in the preceding para no. 11.5 of the order. In view of the\nfinding for AY 2012-13, Ground No. 3 of the appeal is allowed.\n19. Ground Nos. 4, 5 and 6 relate

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

disallowance\nmade by the Ld. AO of ₹45,43,615/- under repairs and maintenance\nwithout there being any justification of as to why such disallowance\nshould be restricted to 10% and not more or fully disallowed.\n24.1 This issue has been decided in ITA No. 1246/KOL/2019 for AY\n2012-13 in the preceding para no. 7.5 of the order

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

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

92F(iiia) of the Act and accordingly tax ought to have been levied at 20% on the Gross receipt of the Assessee under the provisions of section 115A of the Act. This contention of the Assessee was however, without prejudice to the contention that the Assessee does not have a PE in India in terms of the DTAA

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

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

92F(iiia) of the Act and accordingly tax ought to have been levied at 20% on the Gross receipt of the Assessee under the provisions of section 115A of the Act. This contention of the Assessee was however, without prejudice to the contention that the Assessee does not have a PE in India in terms of the DTAA

ACIT, CC- 3(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HIMATSINGKA SEIDE LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalit(Ss)A No.17/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of 10/24, Kumara Krupa Road, High Vs. Income Tax, Central Circle- Grounds, Bangalore-560001. Xvi, Kolkata. (Pan: Aaach3507N) (Appellant) (Respondent) & It(Ss)A No.20/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance as computed by the AO in terms of the directions noted above is liable to be taken into 13 IT(SS)A Nos.17 & 20/Kol/2018 & Himatsingka Seide Ltd., AY 2008-09 account. Accordingly, ground no. 10 of the revenue is allowed. 12. In ground no. 4, assessee has contested on the transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.1

DCIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS (I), LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objections of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2014-15

disallowance was made on the last ray of assessment purely on suspicion. 12 ITA No. 2149/Kol/2019 & C.O. No. 22/Kol/2020 M/s Century Plyboards (I) Ltd. A.Y. 2014-15 20. According to us, the fact that high profits were earned by the eligible unit in comparison to other businesses by itself cannot lead to conclusion that the deduction claimed u/s 80IE

ALMATIS ALUMINA PRIVATE LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the instant appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

92F(h7) and Associated Enterprise as defined in section 92A of the Act, it is evidently clear that the statute does not indicate that 'Enterprise' shall mean the assessee and the 'Associated Enterprise' will mean the other party. As pointed out earlier, the words 'Enterprise' and 'Associated Enterprise' have been used interchangeably. Therefore, the conclusion of the Tribunal in this

ALMATIS ALUMINA PRIVATE LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the instant appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

92F(h7) and Associated Enterprise as defined in section 92A of the Act, it is evidently clear that the statute does not indicate that 'Enterprise' shall mean the assessee and the 'Associated Enterprise' will mean the other party. As pointed out earlier, the words 'Enterprise' and 'Associated Enterprise' have been used interchangeably. Therefore, the conclusion of the Tribunal in this

M/S INSTRUMENTARIUM CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DDIT (IT)-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: The Special Bench:

92F with respect to the said transaction of loan and accordingly interest for purposes of those provisions would have been I.T.A. Nos.1548 and 1549/Kol/2009 Assessment years: 2003-04 and 2004-05 Page 9 of 41 charged as per the principles of arm's length price. Thereafter, it was on the A.O. of M/s. Datex to examine the applicability

RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

92F (ii) which defines ALP to mean a price "which is applied or proposed to be 13 Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt. Ltd. AYs: 2012-13 applied in a transaction between persons other than AEs in uncontrolled conditions". Since the reference is to ‘price’ and to ‘uncontrolled conditions’ it implicitly brings into play the BLT. In other words, it emphasises that

ALMATIS ALUMINA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Years: 2016-17 Almatis Alumina Private Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Limited Commissioner Of Income-Tax/ Vs. Kankaria Estate, 2Nd Floor Income-Tax Officer, National E- 6, Russel Street Assessment Centre, Delhi Kolkata - 700071 [Pan: Aacca2120N] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akhilesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shri G. Hukuga Sema, Cit, D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/05/2023 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Order U/S 144C(13) R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Additional/Joint/Deputy/Asstt. Cit, National E-Assessment Centre, (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Ao”) Dt. 24/03/2021, Pursuant To Directions By The Ld. Dispute Resolution (Drp) U/S 144C(5), Dt. 10/11/2020. 2. We Note That There Is A Delay Of 73 (Seventy Three) Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Impugned Order Is Dated 24/03/2021, Which Falls Within The Period Of Pandemic Of Covid-19. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record By Assessee Explaining The Reasons For Delay, Owing To Pandemic Of Covid-19 During That Time. It Is Noted That The Period Of Delay Falls During The Time Of 2 Assessment Years: 2016-17 Almatis Alumina Private Limited

92F(iii) and Associated Enterprise as defined in section 92A of the Act, it is evidently clear that the statute does not indicate that 'Enterprise' shall mean the assessee and the 'Associated Enterprise' will mean the other party. As pointed out earlier, the words 'Enterprise' and 'Associated Enterprise' have been used interchangeably. Therefore, the conclusion of the 14 Assessment Years

NOMURA RESEARCH INSTITUTE FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

92F(ii) of the Act Arms Length Price means a price which would be charged between persons if they are not associated enterprises and there are no uncontrolled conditions prevailing with reference to the transactions. It is not in dispute that the provision of section 92 of the Act are applicable in respect of the transactions of 4 M/s. Nomura

DCIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NOMURA RESEARCH INSTITUTE & FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

92F(ii) of the Act Arms Length Price means a price which would be charged between persons if they are not associated enterprises and there are no uncontrolled conditions prevailing with reference to the transactions. It is not in dispute that the provision of section 92 of the Act are applicable in respect of the transactions of 4 M/s. Nomura

SPML HCIL JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(4), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 441, 442 & 443/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-2013, 2013-14 & 2014-2015 Spml Hcil Jv,.......................................Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, 22, Camac Street, Kolkata-700016 [Pan: Aadas1471P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-33(4), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 13, 2023

disallowance, on account of any expenditure being excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value, shall be made in respect of a specified domestic transaction referred to in section-92BA, if such transaction is at arm's length price as defined in clause (ii) of section-92F

SPML HCIL JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(4), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 441, 442 & 443/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-2013, 2013-14 & 2014-2015 Spml Hcil Jv,.......................................Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, 22, Camac Street, Kolkata-700016 [Pan: Aadas1471P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-33(4), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 13, 2023

disallowance, on account of any expenditure being excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value, shall be made in respect of a specified domestic transaction referred to in section-92BA, if such transaction is at arm's length price as defined in clause (ii) of section-92F

SPML HCIL JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(4), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 441, 442 & 443/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-2013, 2013-14 & 2014-2015 Spml Hcil Jv,.......................................Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, 22, Camac Street, Kolkata-700016 [Pan: Aadas1471P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-33(4), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 13, 2023

disallowance, on account of any expenditure being excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value, shall be made in respect of a specified domestic transaction referred to in section-92BA, if such transaction is at arm's length price as defined in clause (ii) of section-92F

T.K.M.GLOBAL LOGISTICS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, WARD - 15(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Tkm Global Logistics Limited.........………........................................................……………….…......Appellant Room No. 710 & 711 7Th Floor Diamond Heritage 16, Strand Road Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Aabct 2426 M] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ward-15(1), Kolkata………..........….………....…....Respondent Appearances By: Mr. Ajit Korde, Advocate & Ms. Rachna Agarwal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 26Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, he relied on the order of the DRP. the Act, he relied on the order of the DRP. 7. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts

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

92F(ii) of the Act where the transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred u/s 92BA of the Act. The Act states that either of the above two may be adopted as the "market value". This, in our view justifies the claim of the assessee that it can claim "Market Value" as per limb