ACIT, CIRCLE - 11(2) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SAFAL PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

section 40A of the Act and held that it is a business decision of the assessee which cannot be interfered. Ld. CIT(A) noted that AO cannot step into the shoes of a businessman and thus, deleted the disallowance so made amounting to Rs.92,62,860/-. We note that there is no dispute on the payment of interest. The issue

BMW INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

House, 119, Park\nAaykar Bhawan Poorva,\nStreet, Kolkata-700016,\n110, Shantipally, Em Bypass,\nWest Bengal\nKolkata-700107, West Bengal\n(Appellant)\nVs.\n(Respondent)\nPAN No. AABCB0986G\nAssessee by\nShri SK Tulsiyan &\nShri Puja Somani, ARs\nRevenue by\nShri Ms. Archana Gupta, DR\nDate of hearing:\n14.01.2026\nDate of pronouncement:\n20.01.2026\nORDER\nPer Rajesh Kumar, AM:\nThese are appeals preferred

BMW INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

House, 119, Park\nStreet, Kolkata-700016,\nWest Bengal\n(Appellant)\nVs.\nDCIT, Central Circle 4(1)\nAaykar Bhawan Poorva,\n110, Shantipally, Em Bypass,\nKolkata-700107, West Bengal\n(Respondent)\nPAN No. AABCB0986G\nAssessee by\n:\nShri SK Tulsiyan &\nShri Puja Somani, ARs\nRevenue by\n:\nShri Ms. Archana Gupta, DR\nDate of hearing:\n14.01.2026\nDate of pronouncement:\n20.01.2026\nORDER\nPer

RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaita Nos.78/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 &

40A (2) (a) under which certain types of expenditure incurred by way of payment to related parties is not deductible where the AO "is of the opinion that such expenditure is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value of the goods." In such event, "so much of the expenditure as is so considered

RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaita Nos.78/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 &

40A (2) (a) under which certain types of expenditure incurred by way of payment to related parties is not deductible where the AO "is of the opinion that such expenditure is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value of the goods." In such event, "so much of the expenditure as is so considered

RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaita Nos.78/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 &

40A (2) (a) under which certain types of expenditure incurred by way of payment to related parties is not deductible where the AO "is of the opinion that such expenditure is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value of the goods." In such event, "so much of the expenditure as is so considered

RECKITT BENCKISER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON, HARYANA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 11.1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

40A (2) (a) under which certain types of expenditure incurred by way of\npayment to related parties is not deductible where the AO \"is of the opinion that\nsuch expenditure is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market\nvalue of the goods.\" In such event, \"so much of the expenditure as is so\nconsidered

RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA

40A (2) (a) under which certain types of expenditure incurred by way of\npayment to related parties is not deductible where the AO \"is of the opinion that\nsuch expenditure is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market\nvalue of the goods.\" In such event, \"so much of the expenditure as is so\nconsidered

RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

40A (2) (a) under which certain types of expenditure incurred by way of payment to related parties is not deductible where the AO "is of the opinion that such expenditure is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value of the goods." In such event, "so much of the expenditure as is so considered

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AXIS OVERSEAS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc 1(1), Kolkata Axis Overseas Limited Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, 21A, Shakespeare Sarani, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700107, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca7497L Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2025

house property, where notional income is taken into account, no other income is considered on notional basis but taken on real income theory. Thus, to be taxable the income must fall under any Sections under the Act. Even in cases when deemed income is taxable under the Act, it is not on hypothecation or assumption basis but is based

M/S VISA INTERNATIONAL LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE11(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals for AYs 2005-06 and 2007-08 are partly allowed and appeal for AY 2006-07 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

House, Alipore, Kolkata- Kolkata. 700027. (PAN: AAACV8649P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 13.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28.03.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these captioned appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(A)-20, Kolkata vide

M/S VISA INTERNATIONAL LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE11(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals for AYs 2005-06 and 2007-08 are partly allowed and appeal for AY 2006-07 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

House, Alipore, Kolkata- Kolkata. 700027. (PAN: AAACV8649P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 13.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28.03.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these captioned appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(A)-20, Kolkata vide

M/S VISA INTERNATIONAL LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE11(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals for AYs 2005-06 and 2007-08 are partly allowed and appeal for AY 2006-07 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

House, Alipore, Kolkata- Kolkata. 700027. (PAN: AAACV8649P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 13.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28.03.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these captioned appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(A)-20, Kolkata vide

BARDHAMAN DISHARI SHRAMIK O JANAALYAN SAMABAY SAMITY LIMITED,BURDWAN vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

40a(ia) of the Act. Further addition of Rs. 5,000/- on account of donation was also deleted but balance additions were confirmed. Aggrieved by the said order the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT in its order dated 03.03.2015 set aside the case back to the file by the Ld. CIT(A) with the following comments

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

property\nbelongs to the Lessor and not to the assessee and the assessee cannot\nclaim depreciation also. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the\norder of the Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed 10% of the overall expenses\non estimated basis and granted relief in respect of the rest of the amount\nas the Ld. AO has himself

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

property\nbelongs to the Lessor and not to the assessee and the assessee cannot\nclaim depreciation also. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the\norder of the Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed 10% of the overall expenses\non estimated basis and granted relief in respect of the rest of the amount\nas the Ld. AO has himself

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

property belongs to\nthe Lessor and not to the assessee. The assessee can not claim depreciation\nalso. Considering the factual position, we are of the view that order passed\nby the Id CIT (A) does not contain any infirmity. Therefore, we confirm the\norder of ld. CIT(A). and Ground No. 2 of the appeal is\ndismissed.\n8. Ground

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

property\nbelongs to the Lessor and not to the assessee and the assessee cannot\nclaim depreciation also. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the\norder of the Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed 10% of the overall expenses\non estimated basis and granted relief in respect of the rest of the amount\nas the Ld. AO has himself