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

378 of the paper book. He based the reasons for disallowance on the following points:- a) The project undertaken was an integrated township project and it was not only a housing project according to schedule-1 of the agreement with the Government Agency ADDA. Thus, the claim of the assessee that just because they had 9 Assessment Year

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' has been upheld. All the expenses allowable has already been considered by the AO by allowing deductions u/s 24(a) and administrative expenses and financial charges ITA No.:1218/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Veerprabhu Auto Pvt. Ltd. and therefore, no other expense is allowable. Therefore, the appeal on this ground is dismissed. In the result, the appeal

PIYUSH MOHAN AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

section 48 of the Act. According to him, assessee appears to have availed double deduction of interest on housing loan firstly at the time of furnishing return of income every year under the head loss from self occupied house property and secondly at the time of computing LTCG as claiming the same interest as direct expenses related to transfer

JCT LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

House Property income was assessed in pursuance to Provisions of Section 23 and as such, the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 4, Kolkata is bad in law. 3 I.T.A. No. 84/Kol/2019 I.T.A. No. 2389/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 JCT Limited. 3. That the appellant craves leave to supplement, substitute, add, alter, amend, cancel or otherwise modify

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

House Property income was assessed in pursuance to Provisions of Section 23 and as such, the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 4, Kolkata is bad in law. 3 I.T.A. No. 84/Kol/2019 I.T.A. No. 2389/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 JCT Limited. 3. That the appellant craves leave to supplement, substitute, add, alter, amend, cancel or otherwise modify

SINGHI & CO.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-54, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2010-11] Vs Singhi & Co., Acit, 1B, Old Post Office Street, Circle-54, 54/1, Rafi Kolkata-700001. Ahmed Kidwai Road, Pan-Aasfs9578D Kolkata-700016. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh.Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca Respondent By Sh. Pradip Majumden, Addl. Cit. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 28.11.2018 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

378 (Karnataka) which agreed with the finding of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of R.K.K.R. Steels P.Ltd. reported in 258 ITR 306 which held the expenditure permissible for deduction is expenditure i.e. wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of business. The expenditure which a father incurs out of his natural love and affection

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.

4[four] assessment years immediately succeeding the assessment year for which the loss was first computed. 5[Explanation.—Where any part of the business of a company (6[other than a company whose gross total income consists mainly of income which is chargeable7 under the heads "Interest on securities", "Income from house property", "Capital gains" and "Income from other sources

PANCHAJANYA TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION), WARD-1(4), KOKLATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1841/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

Housing Estate, Lake Town, Kolkata-700089 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AABTP 2734 M (Assessee) .. (Revenue) Assessee by : Shri S.K. Das, FCA Respondent by : Shri Robin Chowdhury, DR सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 25/07/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 01/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The captioned cross appeals filed by the Assessee

ITO(E), WD-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PANCHAJANYA TRUST, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1841/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

Housing Estate, Lake Town, Kolkata-700089 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AABTP 2734 M (Assessee) .. (Revenue) Assessee by : Shri S.K. Das, FCA Respondent by : Shri Robin Chowdhury, DR सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 25/07/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 01/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The captioned cross appeals filed by the Assessee

D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KILBURN ENGINEERING LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd.(HDIL), under two agreements dt. 08.11.2007 & dt. 30.01.2009 for a consideration of Rs. 115 Crores. The sale consideration was payable by HDIL in instalments. There is no dispute that Long Term capital gain (LTCG) of Rs.81,57,21,820 resulted on account of sale of the property at Bhandhup and the transfer of the capital

M/S. BHUMI NIRMAN PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

property. 4.2. Regarding the addition on account of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules, our attention has been invited to a Coordinate Bench order in the case of Elegant Dealmark Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 51/KOL/2024 Page 4 of 7 I.T.A. No.: 1166/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Bhumi Nirman

THE LAXMI SALT CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

house property, capital gains and other sources which includes income from dividends which is exempt from income tax. During this year, according to assessee, the interest derived by them from Fixed Deposits was Rs. 17,19,626/- whereas the interest paid by them was Rs. 2,26,082/- which was also directly attributable to the income which is not exempt

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SPML INFRA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1228/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

4. The ITAT by its judgment dated 16th May, 2014 relied on the self-same reasoning and dismissed the appeal of the revenue. Likewise, the High Court by the impugned judgment dated 5th July, 2017, affirmed the judgments of the CIT and ITAT as concurrent factual findings, which have not been shown to be perverse and, therefore, dismissed the appeal

M/S. SPML INFRA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1228/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

4. The ITAT by its judgment dated 16th May, 2014 relied on the self-same reasoning and dismissed the appeal of the revenue. Likewise, the High Court by the impugned judgment dated 5th July, 2017, affirmed the judgments of the CIT and ITAT as concurrent factual findings, which have not been shown to be perverse and, therefore, dismissed the appeal

GARUD CREDIT & HOLDING PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Garud Credit & Holding Pvt. Limited,.........Appellant D.J. Shah & Co., 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Aaacg9791P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 O R D E R

section 263 of the Act. The assesese placed reliance on plethora of judgments and the same are referred below:- S.No. Title CITATION AUTHORITY Following Page No. of LPP Argument:- Mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) CBDT Circular No.549 dated -- 1 31.10.1989 PCIT vs. Oberoi (2018) 409 ITR 132 The Hon’ble High Court of 2 – 6 Hotels

M/S CREDAI BENGAL,KOLKATA vs. CIT, (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Years:2011-12

housing industry. The assessee is not providing assistance/ support services to any specified individual but to a section of the people, i.e. entrepreneurs/ investors in real estate industry. Therefore, in the circumstances of the case, the object of the assessee is for the benefit of a section of the community or a class identifiable by some common quality of public

GANPATI INDUSTRIEAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. 4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

House, 2, Hare Street Vs Income Tax, Central Circle - 4(2), Kolkata Dalhousie, 3rd Floor Kolkata - 700001 [PAN: AAACG9441Q] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ramesh Kumar Patodia, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 30/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024 आदेश

ITO, WD-5(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BLESSING COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result we set aside the order of the Ld

Bench: Hon‟Ble Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 271/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 I.T.O., Ward-5(3), Kolkata -Vs.- M/S. Blessings Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 228A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aaccb 1349 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Goulen Hangshing, Cit, Dr. For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2017 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Vi, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Dt. 19/11/2013, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The „Act‟), Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts In Brief:- The Assessee Is A Company & Is Engaged In The Business Of Finance & Investment. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12 On 22/09/2010, Declaring –Nil- Income. It Showed A Loss Of Rs.668/-. The Facts As Recorded By The Assessing Officer In The Assessment Order Are Extracted Below:- “Para 1.2.1 The Assessee Has Shown Receipt Of Under Mentioned Share Capital Of Rs.1,90,00,000/- & Share Premium Of Rs.188,10,00,000/- During The Asst. Year 2010-11. The Assessee Credited Rs.1,90,00,000/- In Total In Its Books Against The Above Receipts. The Assessee Claimed That The Detail Of Receipts Are As Under :-

378 & 2164/Del/2008, Assessment Year 2000-2001, ITO vs. M/s. SBS Properties & Finvest Pvt. Ltd., order dt. 30.05.2016, wherein one of us is the author of the decisions, has held as follows: 27. We now consider the merits of the addition without taking into consideration the statement of Shri S.K. Jain or the material found during the search of Shri