THE SATURDAY CLUB LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Dr. Manish Borad

section 22 income from house property is liable to the taxed. The income that the club had made in the instant case was from letting out the rooms. The income was derived from providing many facilities to the members including accommodation. Neither the club nor the members had treated these facilities separately and the department could not also treat them

THE SATURDAY CLUB LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Dr. Manish Borad

section 22 income from house property is liable to the taxed. The income that the club had made in the instant case was from letting out the rooms. The income was derived from providing many facilities to the members including accommodation. Neither the club nor the members had treated these facilities separately and the department could not also treat them

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKA, KOLKATA vs. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

196 Taxman 1/[2010] 329 ITR 91. The first of the two substantial questions of law framed in the said decision was whether section 115JB is applicable to the appellant/assessee therein namely, Kerala State Electricity Board. To be noted that Kerala State Electricity Board is a statutory corporation constituted by the notification of the State of Kerala pursuant

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

196 Taxman 1/[2010] 329 ITR 91. The first of the two substantial questions of law framed in the said decision was whether section 115JB is applicable to the appellant/assessee therein namely, Kerala State Electricity Board. To be noted that Kerala State Electricity Board is a statutory corporation constituted by the notification of the State of Kerala pursuant

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

196 Taxman 1/[2010] 329 ITR 91. The first of the two substantial questions of law framed in the said decision was whether section 115JB is applicable to the appellant/assessee therein namely, Kerala State Electricity Board. To be noted that Kerala State Electricity Board is a statutory corporation constituted by the notification of the State of Kerala pursuant

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

196 Taxman 1/[2010] 329 ITR 91. The first of the two substantial questions of law framed in the said decision was whether section 115JB is applicable to the appellant/assessee therein namely, Kerala State Electricity Board. To be noted that Kerala State Electricity Board is a statutory corporation constituted by the notification of the State of Kerala pursuant

TRUE-MAN CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-7(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

196), Master data as appearing on MCA (197), details of directors as appearing on MCA (198), Memorandum and Articles of Association (199), Copy of PAN Card (217) copy of share application (218), Copy of confirmation of Investment (219) 5. Aryawart Viacom Private 111 Lacs 11,71,50,828/- Copy of Auditor's Report (220), Audited Limited. (Page

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

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

house.\n4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in\ncorrect in treating the expenditure of Rs.55,07,700/- claimed towards\nTrademark and Copyright consultancy under the head \"Professional Fees\"\nas revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure as treated by the AO\nin the assessment proceeding.\n5. That on the facts and circumstances

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

house.\n4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in\ncorrect in treating the expenditure of Rs.55,07,700/- claimed towards\nTrademark and Copyright consultancy under the head \"Professional Fees\"\nas revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure as treated by the AO\nin the assessment proceeding.\n5. That on the facts and circumstances

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

house.\n4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in\ncorrect in treating the expenditure of Rs.55,07,700/- claimed towards\nTrademark and Copyright consultancy under the head \"Professional Fees\"\nas revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure as treated by the AO\nin the assessment proceeding.\n5. That on the facts and circumstances

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

house.\n4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in\ncorrect in treating the expenditure of Rs.55,07,700/- claimed towards\nTrademark and Copyright consultancy under the head \"Professional Fees\"\nas revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure as treated by the AO\nin the assessment proceeding.\n5. That on the facts and circumstances

NAVANSH VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

properties, obligation and securities. The company also carries on Software business as manufacturer, buyer, seller, trader, importer, exporter, distributor, broker, stockiest, and omission agent. The company was incorporated as a private company in 1976, promoted by Giriraj Kishor Agarwal and Tunu Agarwal. Other key persons are Hemant Kumar Tibrewala, Shardadevi Tibrewala, Kamalkant Tibrewala Financials of the company for the past