DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BENGAL AMBUJA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LTD., KOLKATA

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

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

Section 80IB(10) was claimed only in respect of the completed units. The claim was rejected principally on the ground that both the housing projects sanctioned simultaneously together constituted a single composite housing project and therefore deduction was not permissible since completion certificate for the entire housing project was not obtained by 21 I.T.A No.1514/Kol/2015 & ITA No. 1515/Kol/2015 A.Ys

I.T.O WD - 56(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SALARPURIA SOFT ZONE, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

house property. In view of such facts, Ld. CIT, DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 16. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. The above facts are undisputed in respect to cash flow statement filed by the assessee as well as availability of funds. We find that neither

M/S SALARPURIA SOFT ZONE,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RG - 56,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

house property. In view of such facts, Ld. CIT, DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 16. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. The above facts are undisputed in respect to cash flow statement filed by the assessee as well as availability of funds. We find that neither

M/S SALARPURIA SOFT ZONE,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RG - 56,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

house property. In view of such facts, Ld. CIT, DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 16. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. The above facts are undisputed in respect to cash flow statement filed by the assessee as well as availability of funds. We find that neither

I.T.O WD - 56(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SALARPURIA SOFT ZONE, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

house property. In view of such facts, Ld. CIT, DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 16. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. The above facts are undisputed in respect to cash flow statement filed by the assessee as well as availability of funds. We find that neither

ITO, WARD-36(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI RAGHU NANDAN MODI, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

House, Colaba, Mumbai-400005. M/s POL has assigned the task to look after the export business of it. The assessee has not drawn any salary from the company during his tenure from 01.04.2005 to 31.05.2011 as evident from the audited report of POL. However, POL has provided rent free accommodation to assessee by giving its flat as discussed above. However

PARVESH SHARMA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 49(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1388/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Parvesh Sharma,……………………………...……Appellant 106, B.T. Road, Rajbari, Bonhooghly, Kolkata-700108, West Bengal [Pan:Bmpps3173Q] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-49(1), Kolkata, Income Tax Office, Uttarapan Complex Ds-Iv, Kolkata-700054, W.B.

House Property’. Notice under section 143(2) dated 28.09.2019 was issued to the assessee through ITBA Portal, electronically. Further notices under section 142(1) were issued on 12.12.2019 and 18.03.2020 to the assessee through ITBA electronically. During the year under consideration, the assessee has shown income from capital gain and income from other sources along with agricultural income. The assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

property, the assessee was not entitled to anything over and above the agreed rent. The said action of the AO has resulted in taxing notional income in the hands of the assessee, which never accrued and hence cannot be brought to tax. Accordingly, we are of the view that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition and hence

DCIT, CIR-26, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TEWARI WAREHOUSING COMPANY, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands allowed partly for statistical

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11 Dcit, Circle-26 M/S Tewari Warehousing Co. बनाम / Aayakar Bhawan Hide Shed Dump, Old V/S. Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Goragacha Road, Kolkata-88 Road, (South), [Pan No.Aacft 5579 K] Kolkata-68 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Arindam Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Vikash Surana, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 31-01-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 16-03-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata Dated 14.03.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Jcit, Range- 53, Kolkata U/S 143(3)/144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.03.2013 For Assessment Year 2010-11. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Per Its Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing To Assess The Entire Gross Receipts S Business Income & Allow Deductions As Per Section 28 To 43 Of The It Act When Rental Income Of Rs.2,31,00,000/- Was Already Included In The Gross Receipts. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Estimation Of Business Profits Of Rs.2,37,72,132/- Made By The Ao Though Rejection Of Assessee’S Books Of Account U/S 145(3) Considering The Facts Of The Case. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A)’S Order Is Contrary To The Law & Fact Of The Case. 4. The Appellant Craves Leaves To, Add To, Alter Or Modify Any One Or All Of The Grounds Of Appeal Mentioned Above.”

House Property. 6. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The assessee before the ld. CIT(A) submitted that it is providing complex & composite services such as packing, blending, storing, transporting along with other adequate facilities such as security, wooden pallets to keep the goods safe and under hygienic conditions to the parties. Thus, the predominant object

RAMAUTAR SARAF (HUF),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 59(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

100/-. The case was\nselected for scrutiny. The notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act along\nwith questionnaire were issued and served upon the assessee. During\nthe course of assessment proceedings, the Id. AO noted that the\nassessee has sold a house property acquired in F.Y. 2004-05, situated\nat 76, Cotton Street, Kolkata

ACIT, CIRCLE-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SMT. RESHMI P LOYALKA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the Cross Objection of the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1763 /Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13

property, deed of plots of land, occupation certificate of constructed residential houses and copy of receipt of cess issued by District Town Planner, Cum- Member Secretary, Composition Committee, Gurgaon. The assessee also produced copy of bills raised by the supplier of building construction material, copy of bills raised by interior decorator, copy of acknowledgement of cheque/ draft receipt

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(4), KOLKATA vs. M/S PAWAN INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2004-05

100/- Income from business : (-) Rs.2,32,687/- Income from House Property Gross annual value -4,03,200 Less:deduction u/s 24(a) -1,20,960 : Rs.2,82,240/- Total Income : Rs. 49,553/- 4. The profit as per profit and loss account was arrived at by the Assessee after considering the following items of income. Share trading income (loss

M/S. SORMISTHA BUILDERS & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,ASANSOL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.144/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2009-2010) M/S Sormistha Builders & Vs. Acit/Circle-1/Asansol-713304 Construction (P) Limited, Senreleigh Road, West Apcar Gardens, Asansol-4, Dist-Burdwan-713304 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaics 8345 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.N.Ram, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prabal Choudhury, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2009-2010, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Asansol, In Appeal No.234/Cit(A)/Asl/Cir-1/Asl/11-12, Dated 01.12.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 11.03.2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2009-10 On 12.01.2011 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.18,63,098/-. Assessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S.143(3) Of The Act & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making Various Additions. M/S Sormistha Builders & Construction (P) Ltd.

section 23 the proviso reads as under :- “Provided that the taxes levied by any local authority in respect of the property shall be deducted (irrespective of the previous year in which the liability to pay such taxes was incurred by the owner according to the method of accounting regularly employed by him) in determining the annual value of the property

OBEROI BUILDINGS AND INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

House Property” and subsequently the claim of the assessee for deduction on account of various expenses was restricted by him determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,43,020/-. He also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) in respect of addition made to the total income of the assessee as a result of change of Head

ITO,WARD-4(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ADVANI PRIVATE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judical Member] I.T.A. No. 1952/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 I.T.O, Ward-4(3), Kolkata….…….………………………………………….…………….........Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square Kolkata – 700 001 Advani Private Ltd………………………...……………………...…………………………...….Respondent 3A, Garstin Place Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Aacca 1895 Q] Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. Cit, Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 8Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 4Th, 2018 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

Section 73 of the Act. He submitted that the assessee’s gross total income is Rs.4,15,100/-, and that it solely consists of income assessable under the head “income from house property

SUSHIL MITRUKA,SILIGURI vs. P.C.I.T., SILIGURI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

property and also made addition of Rs.67,33,100/- towards cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee whereas the Ld. Pr. CIT has stated that the Assessing Officer has added lesser amount by deducting the total cash expenditure shown by the assessee on the construction of the house during the impugned year of Rs.79,76,789/- and reducing

SUSHIL MITRUKA,SILIGURI vs. P.C.I.T., SILIGURI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

property and also made addition of Rs.67,33,100/- towards cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee whereas the Ld. Pr. CIT has stated that the Assessing Officer has added lesser amount by deducting the total cash expenditure shown by the assessee on the construction of the house during the impugned year of Rs.79,76,789/- and reducing

SUSHIL MITRUKA,SILIGURI vs. P.C.I.T., SILIGURI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

property and also made addition of Rs.67,33,100/- towards cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee whereas the Ld. Pr. CIT has stated that the Assessing Officer has added lesser amount by deducting the total cash expenditure shown by the assessee on the construction of the house during the impugned year of Rs.79,76,789/- and reducing