DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INDIA CITY PROPERTIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for A

249 ITR 47 and held that the service charges received by the assessee were chargeable to tax in its hand under the head “income from house property”. Accordingly, the claim of the assessee for business loss was disallowed by him and after allowing standard deduction of 30%, net income of Rs. 22,83,278/- on account of service charges

DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INDIA CITY PROPERTIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for A

249 ITR 47 and held that the service charges received by the assessee were chargeable to tax in its hand under the head “income from house property”. Accordingly, the claim of the assessee for business loss was disallowed by him and after allowing standard deduction of 30%, net income of Rs. 22,83,278/- on account of service charges

GAUTAM KUMAR MITRA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 54, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 07/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2006-07

house property is to be made as per sections 23(b) & 23(c) which prescribe actual rent received or receivable' as the basis. The assessee’s explanation is therefore unacceptable. It can not therefore be denied that there has been concealment of particulars of income in respect of rent in the original return and penalty

M/S BENGAL SHRISTI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

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

Properties; [2012] 206 Taxmann 584 (Bom.) 6 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Bengal Shristi Infrastructure Development Ltd  Viswas Promoters P. Ltd. v. ACIT; [2013] 29 taxmann.com 19 (Madras)  Madanlal Gupta vs. CIT 9 Taxmann.com 235  ACIT vs. Ashiana Amar Developers, 178 TTJ 424 (ITAT Kolkata)  CBDT Circular No. 205/3/2001/ITA-II dated 4th May 2001  Bengal Ambuja Housing Development Ltd. vs. DCIT

DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue(in ITA No

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.986 & 987/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12& 2012-13) D.C.I.T, Circle-6(1), Vs. M/S. National Engineering

249 ITR 47, wherein it was held that when rendering services are integral part of the tenancy agreement, it becomes part of income from house property. Therefore, on the same basis the service charges income of Rs.2,40,28,343/-was added to the rental annual value under section

DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue(in ITA No

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.986 & 987/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12& 2012-13) D.C.I.T, Circle-6(1), Vs. M/S. National Engineering

249 ITR 47, wherein it was held that when rendering services are integral part of the tenancy agreement, it becomes part of income from house property. Therefore, on the same basis the service charges income of Rs.2,40,28,343/-was added to the rental annual value under section

RAJIB CHAKRABORTY,KOLKATA vs. ITO- WARD-30(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

249 of the Act, which provides power to the Id. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and consideration of this expression has fallen for consideration before the Hon'ble High Courts as well as before

GANESHDAS RAMGOPAL,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-40, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year : 1999-2000

house property income or other sources. The limited issue was that before CIT u/s 264 of the Act that the AO erred in treating the municipal taxes received as income of the assessee which was deleted by the ld. CIT u/s 264 of the Act. As such, there was no mistake apparent from record in the order

DCIT, CIRCLE - 12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AMRI HOSPITALS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

House Property. 7. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is erred by not appreciating the facts that the assessee Page 3 of 22 I.T.A. No.: 977/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 AMRI Hospitals Ltd. company was required to provide additional services and facilities other than just its property given on rent

ITO WARD-41(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI SHYAMAL BANERJEE, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 143(3)/254/251, in respect of assessment year 1993-94 was the same, and the assessee accepted the same without preferring any appeal. As a matter of fact, the revenue has never produced any such material in support of its contention. On the other hand, vide page No. 104 and 106 of the paper book the assessee produced

DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm]

249 ITR 47 (Cal)” 6. We note that the aforesaid grounds raised by the Revenue before the Hon’ble High Court has been dismissed and the Tribunal’s order to treat the service charges as business income instead from house property has been upheld. We note that the order of the Tribunal has been followed

M/S SOMU PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Him With Ita No. 709/Kol/14 M/S. Somu Properties Pvt. Ltd 1

section 249(2) of the Act. Thus, he urged that the CIT-A may be directed to condone the said delay and consider the issue(s) on merits. Before us the ld.AR of the assessee undertakes that the assessee shall cooperate with the CIT-A in prosecuting its case without seeking any adjournment. On the other hand, the ld.DR

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

249 ITR 533. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced below : “6. Sec. 164 does not create a charge on the income of a discretionary trust. The word ‘charge’ in s. 164 means ‘levy’. Sec. 164(2) refers to the relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes. If such income

DCIT, CIRCLE-22, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S LOVELOCK & LEWES, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

house property & rent and conducts its business under the name & style of M/s. Lovelock & Lewes. The assessee filed its original return of income declaring a total income of Rs.24,84,85,909/- within due date i.e on 30-09- 2009. Subsequently, the assessee filed a revised return declaring total income at Rs.25,37,78,154/-. The AO determined the same

M/S ERNST & YOUNG LLP,KOLKATA vs. CIT-3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 499/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- C.I.T., Kol-3, Kolkata Kolkata. [Pan : Aabce 9188 P] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri B.N.Bajoria, Sr.Advocate Shri D.Ghosh, Fca For The Respondent : Shri Niraj Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 15.05.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 19.05.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.03.2015 Of Cit- Kol-3, Kolkata Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act.).

house property, profits and gains of business or profession, capital gains, income from other sources. Chapter V then brings income of other persons, which are to be included in the total income of an Assessee and this is contained in section 60 to 65 of the Act. Chapter- VI (containing sec. 66 to 80) then lays down provisions regarding aggregation

ACIT, CIRCLE - 6(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S. NAGREEKA SYNTHETICS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal]

249/-. In this case a notice dated 2 Nagreeka Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. AY 2008-09 30.03.2015 u/s. 148 of the Act was issued and duly served upon the assessee for the reason that the assessee company had business of trading of shares and derivative transactions which are covered by the provisions of Explanation to Section

DCIT, CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MICROFIRM CAPITAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey]

Properties Private Limited and 1,30,000, 0.1% RNCPS were allotted to M/s. Jaguar Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd. The assessee had received an amount of Rs.41 Crores from this allotment. The Assessing Officer considered the valuation report furnished by the assessee regarding the fair market value of RNCPS , applied Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, and came

M/S. MICROFIRM CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey]

Properties Private Limited and 1,30,000, 0.1% RNCPS were allotted to M/s. Jaguar Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd. The assessee had received an amount of Rs.41 Crores from this allotment. The Assessing Officer considered the valuation report furnished by the assessee regarding the fair market value of RNCPS , applied Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, and came