MAITHAN CERAMIC LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Section 140\nof the said Act and delivered at my office on or before\n(b) ** produce or cause to be produced before me at my office at 3rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally,\nAayakar Bhawan Poorva, Kolkata - 700107 on 16.05.2013 at 01:15 P.M. the accounts and / or\ndocuments specified overleaf. \"AS PER ANNEXURE-A ENCLOSED\"\n(c) **furnish

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as cross-objection of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1964/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata…………….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Birla Corporation Ltd…………...........…..........................…..…..... Respondent Birla Building, 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata – 700001. [Pan: Aabcb2075J] C.O. 39/Kol/2019 (A/O I.T.A. No.1964/Kol/2019) Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S Birla Corporation Ltd…………...........….....................…..…..... Cross-Objector Birla Building, 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata – 700001. [Pan: Aabcb2075J] Vs Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata…………….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 16, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal By The Revenue & The Corresponding Cross Objections By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated 30.05.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). First, We Take Up Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.1964/Kol/2019. I.T.A. No.1964/Kol/2019 & C.O. 39/Kol/2019 M/S Birla Corporation Ltd

property, goods or service has been acquired under similar market conditions. It is also settled that choice of tested party is of lesser significance for the purpose of application of CUP method but instead key factor in application of CUP is product comparability and similar market conditions. Further the CUP method can be classified into two categories i.e. internal

I.T.O(E)-II, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. FUTURE EDUCATION RESCARCH TRUST., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s CO is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & C.O.No.69/Kol/2013 (A/O Ita No.1031/Kol/2013) Assessment Year:2009-10

property held under trust for charitable purposes, which is of the nature referred to in s. 11(4A), tax shall be charged on so much of the relevant income as is not exempt under s. 11. Sec. 164(2) was reintroduced by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989, w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. Earlier it was omitted by the Direct

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA vs. TCG URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

housing project at Mumbai. The assessee has justified the expenses in so far that they were legitimate business expenses, and that the genuineness of the claims had not been questioned by the ld. A.O. There would undoubtedly be certain expenditure ITA Nos. 2584 to 2588 & A.Ys. 2004­05 to 2007­08 & 2009­10 ACIT, C­2 (1), Kol Vs. TCG Urban Infras. Holding P.Ltd

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

House at Chowringhee, Kolkata consisting of total area of the property 35.60 kottah. The assessee has sold its property for a composite consideration of Rs. 21 crores on dated 28th June 2001 to M/s Reliance Industries Limited. The sale price for the land was considered at Rs. 17,92,41,908/- and balance

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

House at Chowringhee, Kolkata consisting of total area of the property 35.60 kottah. The assessee has sold its property for a composite consideration of Rs. 21 crores on dated 28th June 2001 to M/s Reliance Industries Limited. The sale price for the land was considered at Rs. 17,92,41,908/- and balance

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

House at Chowringhee, Kolkata consisting of total area of the property 35.60 kottah. The assessee has sold its property for a composite consideration of Rs. 21 crores on dated 28th June 2001 to M/s Reliance Industries Limited. The sale price for the land was considered at Rs. 17,92,41,908/- and balance

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

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

House at Chowringhee, Kolkata consisting of total area of the property 35.60 kottah. The assessee has sold its property for a composite consideration of Rs. 21 crores on dated 28th June 2001 to M/s Reliance Industries Limited. The sale price for the land was considered at Rs. 17,92,41,908/- and balance

SAFAL PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2016-17

164 taxmann.com 376 (Calcutta) was also filed in which reliance has been placed upon the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT (Central) Vs. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. (supra) and it has been held that the Tribunal took note of the decision of the High Court of Delhi in Pr. CIT (Central

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MCNALLY BHARATI ENGINEERING CO.LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.100/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2006-07

property was handed over to the assessee on which the mills were run. The seller went into liquidation and subsequently the amounts were written off as bad debts by the assessee on account of incapacity of the seller to pay the same. The court held that by making a deposit of Rs.20,00,000/- the assessee had acquired licence

DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S RAV DRAVYA PVT LTD , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenues is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 103/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Rav Dravya Private Limited Tax, Circle-4(1), Kolkata Hastings Chambers, 2Nd Floor Vs 7/C, Kiran Shankar Roy Road Kolkata - 700001 Pan : Aabcr3154Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Revenue By : Md. Ghayasuddin, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 13/03/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. This Revenue’S Appeal Is Time Barred By 198 Days & The Petition Seeking Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed Stating That The Delay In Filing Of This Appeal Was Attributable To The Restrictions Imposed Due To Covid-19 Pandemic. We Have Heard Both The Sides & Find That There Is Reasonable Cause For Delay In Filing Of The Appeal On Time. Hence We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing.

house property", "Capital gains" and "Income from other sources"], or a company 8[the principal business of which is the business of trading in shares or banking] or the granting of loans and advances) consists in the purchase and sale of shares of other companies, such company shall, for the purposes of this section7, be deemed to be carrying

RAM NIRANJAN BANKA,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 40,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ram Niranjan Banka Acit, Circle-40 1, Surti Bagan Street, Jorasanko, 3, Govt. Place (West), Vs. Kolkata-700073, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aedpb5273P Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.11.2025

section 54(1)(ii) of the Act. The provision talks about ‘new asset’. In the present case, the flat in question is the ‘new asset’. Hence has to be treated as whole and cannot be broken up into components as contended by the assessee. Ram Niranjan Banka; A.Y. 2014-15 3.5. The Ld. AO erred in considering 1st Floor Flat

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S STABLE TRADING COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Itat House Property Rs.4,53,600/- Loss From Business Rs.(-) 20,58,153 Add: 14A Disallowance Rs.36,41`,968/- Rs.15,83,815/- Short Term Capital Gain 9,37,49,029/- Total Income Rs.9,57,86,444/- Tax On Above On Rs. 20,37,415/- @33.99% Rs.6,92,517/- On Rs.9,37,49,029/- Rs.1,59,32,647/- Total Tax Rs.1,66,25,164/- Income As Computed After Cit(A) Effect Of Section 14A. House Property Rs.4,53,600/- Loss From Business (-)Rs.20,58,153/- Short Term Capital Gain Rs.9,37,49,029/- Total Income 9,21,44,476/- 1

164/- Income as computed after CIT(A) effect of section 14A. House property Rs.4,53,600/- Loss from business (-)Rs.20,58,153/- Short term capital gain Rs.9,37,49,029/- Total Income 9,21,44,476/- 1

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRAPHITE INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, considering the discussions made above, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

house expenses etc. were not considered in the profit and loss account of the power units. Thereafter, ld. AO proceeded to allocate such expenses to the power undertakings on an ad- hoc basis on a formula worked out by him. The ld. CIT(A) was persuaded by the arguments that all expenses considered for allocation here

ROHIT JALAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2205/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

164/-. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act and no scrutiny assessment was made. Thereafter, the AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The assessee is an individual who claimed LTCG to the tune of Rs.28,93,483/- on sale of shares of M/s. Tuni Textiles Ltd. The AO reopened the assessment on the basis

N C SHAW AND CO BEVERAGES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RANGE-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

164 to 167 of the paper book. 5. It is also pertinent to add that the sale of liquor is subject to collection of tax at source (‘TCS’) at the time when sales is made to distributors @ 1% or less than 1% (in case lower withholding certificate is issued to such distributors by the income tax authorities). The list

N C SHAW AND CO BEVERAGES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS CIRCLE 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

164 to 167 of the paper book. 5. It is also pertinent to add that the sale of liquor is subject to collection of tax at source (‘TCS’) at the time when sales is made to distributors @ 1% or less than 1% (in case lower withholding certificate is issued to such distributors by the income tax authorities). The list

STAR PAPER MILLS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P. M .Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

property, good or service has been acquired under a comparable uncontrolled transaction under similar market conditions. The application of CUP Method requires strict product comparability which has been transacted under similar conditions. This method can be applied where AEs buy or sell similar goods or services in comparable transactions with unrelated enterprises or when unrelated enterprises buy or sell similar