RAJATGIRI OIL INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

house property. Accordingly, deduction for depreciation is not available under these sections against the rental income from the aforesaid property

RAJATGIRI OIL INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

house property. Accordingly, deduction for depreciation is not available under these sections against the rental income from the aforesaid property

RAJATGIRI OIL INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-28/KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

house property. Accordingly, deduction for depreciation is not available under these sections against the rental income from the aforesaid property

VEERPRABHU AUTO PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 2(4), KOL, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

House property". Further the Ld. AO disallowed the expenses such as depreciation, repairs & maintenance and computed the income from house

WINDOW TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL) - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2019-20

house property. He also found that assessee company had also claimed depreciation as per the ITR under Building Schedule @10% for the year

RAI BHAGWAN DAS BAGLA BAHADURS MARWARI HINDU HOSPITAL,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 49(3) NOW, I.T.O., WARD - 44(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Rai Bhagwan Das Bagla Ito, Ward-49(3), Bahadurs Marwari Hindu 3, Govt. Place (West), Hospital Kolkata-700001, Vs. 1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Martin West Bengal Burn House, Kolkata-700001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aactr1297C Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhary, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.12.2024

house property and no depreciation was claimed on this property. As argued by the learned Counsel for the assessee that

WEST BENGAL ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

House property. Net Annual Value is Gross\nAnnual Value less Municipal Taxes paid. In case the property is let out, its rent\nreceived is Gross Annual Value,\nIn view of the above, it is clear that standard deduction@ 30% is available u/s\n24 of the IT Act, 1961 only on Rent received and not on Electricity Recovery.\nService Charges

WEST BENGAL ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

House property. Net Annual Value is Gross\nAnnual Value less Municipal Taxes paid. In case the property is let out, its rent\nreceived is Gross Annual Value,\nIn view of the above, it is clear that standard deduction@ 30% is available u/s\n24 of the IT Act, 1961 only on Rent received and not on Electricity Recovery.\nService Charges

ACIT, CIRCLE - 11(2) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SAFAL PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

house property. Accordingly, depreciation was allowed on the boat even though it had earned rentals for three months amounting to Rs. 75,000/-. We do agree

TIRIYOGI NARAYAN SINGH,1,GIBSON LANE, SUITE 213, 2ND FLOOR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-28, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, GARIAHAT ROAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1965/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Tiriyogi Narayan Singh, Vs Acit, Circle-28, Kolkata C/O: Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 Pan No. :Apmps 8395 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashutosh Kumar Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21/08/2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, On The Following Grounds :- 1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,82,18,524/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Oil & Fuel Expenses. 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs. 53,40,091/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Truck Running Expenses As Against 80,35,546/-Claimed By The Assessee. 3. (A) For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs. 3,71,736/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Finance Charges Paid For Acquisition Of Self Occupied House Property.

house property. 4. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 3,52,603/- made by the A.O. on account of finance charges allegedly paid to M/s S.T.F. Co. Ltd without deduction of TDS. 5. For that on the facts and in the circumstances

UNITED BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-36(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.546 To 548/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2017-18 United Bank Of India Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd……Appellant 14/4, Sovaram Bysak Street, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aaaau1388A] Vs. Ito, Ward-36(4), Kolkata….…….....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri G. Banerjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 28.07.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, The Facts & Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.546/Kol/2022 For Assessment Year 2015-16 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita 546/Kol/2022 – The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

House Property instead of under Profits & Gains of Business or Pro is wrong, arbitrary, misconceived, erroneous, excessive and deserves to be reversed. 5. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the disallowance of expenses of Rs. 745174 incurred for and depreciation

UNITED BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-36(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.546 To 548/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2017-18 United Bank Of India Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd……Appellant 14/4, Sovaram Bysak Street, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aaaau1388A] Vs. Ito, Ward-36(4), Kolkata….…….....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri G. Banerjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 28.07.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, The Facts & Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.546/Kol/2022 For Assessment Year 2015-16 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita 546/Kol/2022 – The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

House Property instead of under Profits & Gains of Business or Pro is wrong, arbitrary, misconceived, erroneous, excessive and deserves to be reversed. 5. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the disallowance of expenses of Rs. 745174 incurred for and depreciation

UNITED BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 36(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.546 To 548/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2017-18 United Bank Of India Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd……Appellant 14/4, Sovaram Bysak Street, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aaaau1388A] Vs. Ito, Ward-36(4), Kolkata….…….....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri G. Banerjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 28.07.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, The Facts & Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.546/Kol/2022 For Assessment Year 2015-16 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita 546/Kol/2022 – The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

House Property instead of under Profits & Gains of Business or Pro is wrong, arbitrary, misconceived, erroneous, excessive and deserves to be reversed. 5. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the disallowance of expenses of Rs. 745174 incurred for and depreciation

EMERALD COMPANY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

house property at Rs. 3,60,000/- and interest on bank deposits at Rs. 58,298/-. Thereafter, he proceeded to draw the conclusion that the entire gamut of expenses claimed by the assessee were relatable to exempted income and were thus, required to be assessed u/s 14A of the Act. Incidentally, considering the specific directive in Section

POINEER PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 7(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 467/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Pioneer Property Management Limited,…….Appellant 1St Floor, 10A, Rowdon Street, Kolkata-700017 [Pan:Aaccp5904H] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Circle-7(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ankur Goyal, Jcit, Sr. D.R. Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 07, 2024 O R D E R

House. The ld. Assessing Officer drew adverse 3 Pioneer Property Management Limited inference against the assessee and rejected its contention to claim the following expenses:- (a) Electricity charges Rs. 49,590/- (b) Maintenance charges Rs. 1,26,268/- (c) Depreciation

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

house at Nalla Fort was used during the relevant previous year for business related activities of the appellant. 3. That the learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the submissions of the appellant and solely relying on the observations made by the Assessing Officer in relation to a previous year different from the previous year relevant to the assessment under

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-8, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

house at Nalla Fort was used during the relevant previous year for business related activities of the appellant. 3. That the learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the submissions of the appellant and solely relying on the observations made by the Assessing Officer in relation to a previous year different from the previous year relevant to the assessment under

DCIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA ,KOLKATA vs. OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD. , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

house at Nalla Fort was used during the relevant previous year for business related activities of the appellant. 3. That the learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the submissions of the appellant and solely relying on the observations made by the Assessing Officer in relation to a previous year different from the previous year relevant to the assessment under