ACIT, CIRCLE - 13(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PADMA LOGISTICS & KHANIJ PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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]

set off of brought forward losses transferred from the demerged company M/s. SYK. Since the assessee company meets all the requirements contained in the Income-tax Act, 1961, all the carried forward losses and unabsorbed Depreciation in respect of M/s. Vortal Undertaking were transferred, pursuant to section 72A(4) of the Act, from the demerged company (M/s. Star Ya Kalakaar.Com

M/S. MILLENNIUM STOCK BROKING (P) LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

disallowing set off of unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.952839/- from income from other sources ignoring the mandate of section 32(2) read with section 72(2) of I.T.ACT, 1961 and settled law. The same be allowed in full. (2)b) That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in agreeing with AO in ignoring that

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. M/S PRB SECURITIES PVT.LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 211/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Prb Securities Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcp 5425 G ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

set- off their profit. The methodology used was the same. The beneficiary who wants loss buys the share at high rate from the beneficiary who is taking LTCG. ' In para 2.10 the AO has listed names of 84 scripts furnished by the investigation ring which are alleged to be used for providing bogus accommodation entries of loss or gain

D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GUINESS SECURITES LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] I.T.A No. 1712/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10

loss in terms of Explanation to section 73 of the Act and disallowed to be set off against other business

M/S PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Pricewaterhouse Coopers Private Limited……...............................……………………......Appellant Block-Ep, Plot –Y14 Salt Lake City Sector-V Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan : Aabcp 9181 H] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata……..........................…....Appellant Appearances By: Shri Kanchun Kaushal, A/R & Shri Bikash Kr. Jain, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Vijay Shankar, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 25Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 29Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

disallowance of foreign exchange loss on maturity of MTM contracts amounting to Rs.3,45,06,888 wit amounting to Rs.3,45,06,888 without appreciating that the Hon’ble DRP has hout appreciating that the Hon’ble DRP has directed to allow the claim of such loss on maturity of MTM contracts and that directed to allow the claim

BANGIYA GRAMIN VIKASH BANK,MURSHIDABAD vs. ACIT, CIR.42, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 2580 & 2581/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Circle - 42, Murshidabad Nh-34, Bmc House P.O. Chuanpur, Berhampore Murshidabad - 742101 [Pan : Aaalb0462D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/03/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 12, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dated 26/09/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08:- “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-12, Kolkata Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal & Without Any Jurisdiction. 2. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Was Wrong In Not Considering The Merit Of The Case, Therefore, The Order Passed By The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal. 3. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Was Wrong In Not Considering The Facts That In Reopening The Assessment U/S. 148 (R.W.S. 147)

disallowance of carry forward loss set off of brought forward losses an amounting to Rs.3,52,68,36,000/- which

BANGIYA GRAMIN VIKASH BANK,MURSHIDABAD vs. ACIT, CIR.42, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 2580 & 2581/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Circle - 42, Murshidabad Nh-34, Bmc House P.O. Chuanpur, Berhampore Murshidabad - 742101 [Pan : Aaalb0462D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/03/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 12, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dated 26/09/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08:- “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-12, Kolkata Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal & Without Any Jurisdiction. 2. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Was Wrong In Not Considering The Merit Of The Case, Therefore, The Order Passed By The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal. 3. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Was Wrong In Not Considering The Facts That In Reopening The Assessment U/S. 148 (R.W.S. 147)

disallowance of carry forward loss set off of brought forward losses an amounting to Rs.3,52,68,36,000/- which

ROHIT KUMAR, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE UNITED PROVINCES SUGAR COMPANY PVT LTD, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2024-25 Ito, Ward-12(1), Kolkata…..……..……….………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. M/S The United Provinces Sugar Company Pvt. Ltd.…….....……...…..…..Respondent 1St Floor, Chartered Bank Building, 4, Netaji Subhash Road, Kol-1. [Pan: Aaact4947L] Appearances By: Shri S B Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri J P Khaitan, Sr. Counsel, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 03, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2025 Of The Addl/Jcit(A)-9, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2024–25. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 11.10.2024 Claiming A Refund Of Rs.15,61,200/- Pursuant To Set-Off Of Brought Forward Business Loss Against The Returned Income. Intimation Order U/S. 143(1) Of The Act Was Directly Passed On 01.11.2024, Assessing A Refund Of Rs.16,22,410/- & Allowing Setoff Of Brought Forward Loss Against Income As Done In The Return Of Income. However, The Order Did Not Capture The Schedule Of Carry Forward Business Loss & Unabsorbed Depreciation For Earlier Years. M/S The United Provinces Sugar Company Pvt. Ltd 3. Aggrieved By The Above Order, The Assessee Filed Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee By Observing As Under:

loss and unabsorbed depreciation. The ld. AR further submits that the disallowance is not justified when the set off of losses

M/S. COAST LINERS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

set off of the loss for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2011-12. He also noted that no evidence was brought on record by the assessee to show that the loss for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2011-12 as claimed by the assessee was actually determined in the assessment and the same was allowed to be carried forward. He, therefore, disallowed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RAMKRISHNA FORGINGS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross- objection of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2009-10

set of circumstances, they are heard together and disposed off by way of this common order. gether and disposed off by way of this common order. 3. We first take up the revenue appeals. The Grounds of appeal in ITA No. We first take up the revenue appeals. The Grounds of appeal in ITA No. We first take

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, subject to the verification as mentioned

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2023-24 Ncgb Retrofit Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata 3A, St. George Terrace, Vs Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Kolkata-700022, West Bengal Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacn8752B Present For: Appellant By : Shri Anup Singh, Ar Respondent By : Shri Supriya Pal, Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2024 O R D E R Per Rakesh Mishra: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A)-12, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld. Addl/ Jt. Cit (A)” ) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Ay 2023-24 Dated 22.05.2024, Which Has Been Passed Against The Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act Issued By The Cpc, Bengaluru.

losses could not be disallowed from being set off as for setting off the brought forward loss, there is no requirement

RAMPURIA INDUSTRIES & INVESTMENTS LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL - 1, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallow the loss in question and hence the conclusion that the Assessing Officer has not called for the details and verified the same conclusion that the Assessing Officer has not called for the details and verified the same conclusion that the Assessing Officer has not called for the details and verified the same after application of mind, is a factually

NAGREEKA EXPORTS LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.947/Kol/2016 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.906/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2009-10 )

set offthe said loss against the business income, hence we delete the disallowance of following losses: (i). Disallowance of crystallized

NAGREEKA EXPORTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.947/Kol/2016 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.906/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2009-10 )

set offthe said loss against the business income, hence we delete the disallowance of following losses: (i). Disallowance of crystallized

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

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

disallowed loss of Rs.4,74,97,275/- holding it as "speculative loss" and did not allow its set off in assessment

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

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

disallowed loss of Rs.4,74,97,275/- holding it as "speculative loss" and did not allow its set off in assessment

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

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

disallowed loss of Rs.4,74,97,275/- holding it as "speculative loss" and did not allow its set off in assessment

RITA GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR.2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

loss in broodmares account and in pig account which is set off against its income from other sources under the head business. The AO disallowed