BALAKA VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act depends on the outcome of the appeal on quantum addition in ITA No. 161/Kol/2024, we first taken up ITA No. 161/Kol/2024 for adjudication. 3. Facts in brief are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in business and declared income of Rs.318/- in the original return of income furnished

ABN AMRO BANK N.V.,KOLKATA vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

permanent establishment. In the calculation of such profit by a banking enterprise interest paid can be taken as a deduction by virtue of article 7(3) read with article 11 (7). The assessee was a Netherlands company· and its principal branch office was in India. In the course of its banking activities, the branch office in India remitted substantial funds

M/S RUNGTA CEMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shriwaseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.2257 To 2263/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2016-17) M/S Rungta Cements Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Room No.301, Mangalan Building, 24, Hemant Basu Sarani, Dalhousi, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr5445F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 08.08.2019Arising Penalty Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2016-17 U/S 271(1B)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing Of The Matter & Therefore We Have Heard The Ld. Dr & Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record Before Us. 3. The Imposition Of Penalty Of Rs.10,000/- U/S 271(1B) Of The Act Has Been Challenged By The Assessee For Non-Compliance Of The Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Dated 28.11.2017 As It Appears From The Record & Also Submitted By The Ld. Dr

penalty order u/s 271(1B) of the Act was filed wherein the assessee categorically mentioned that the permanent established of the assessee

M/S RUNGTA CEMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shriwaseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.2257 To 2263/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2016-17) M/S Rungta Cements Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Room No.301, Mangalan Building, 24, Hemant Basu Sarani, Dalhousi, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr5445F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 08.08.2019Arising Penalty Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2016-17 U/S 271(1B)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing Of The Matter & Therefore We Have Heard The Ld. Dr & Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record Before Us. 3. The Imposition Of Penalty Of Rs.10,000/- U/S 271(1B) Of The Act Has Been Challenged By The Assessee For Non-Compliance Of The Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Dated 28.11.2017 As It Appears From The Record & Also Submitted By The Ld. Dr

penalty order u/s 271(1B) of the Act was filed wherein the assessee categorically mentioned that the permanent established of the assessee

M/S RUNGTA CEMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shriwaseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.2257 To 2263/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2016-17) M/S Rungta Cements Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Room No.301, Mangalan Building, 24, Hemant Basu Sarani, Dalhousi, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr5445F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 08.08.2019Arising Penalty Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2016-17 U/S 271(1B)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing Of The Matter & Therefore We Have Heard The Ld. Dr & Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record Before Us. 3. The Imposition Of Penalty Of Rs.10,000/- U/S 271(1B) Of The Act Has Been Challenged By The Assessee For Non-Compliance Of The Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Dated 28.11.2017 As It Appears From The Record & Also Submitted By The Ld. Dr

penalty order u/s 271(1B) of the Act was filed wherein the assessee categorically mentioned that the permanent established of the assessee

M/S RUNGTA CEMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shriwaseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.2257 To 2263/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2016-17) M/S Rungta Cements Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Room No.301, Mangalan Building, 24, Hemant Basu Sarani, Dalhousi, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr5445F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 08.08.2019Arising Penalty Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2016-17 U/S 271(1B)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing Of The Matter & Therefore We Have Heard The Ld. Dr & Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record Before Us. 3. The Imposition Of Penalty Of Rs.10,000/- U/S 271(1B) Of The Act Has Been Challenged By The Assessee For Non-Compliance Of The Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Dated 28.11.2017 As It Appears From The Record & Also Submitted By The Ld. Dr

penalty order u/s 271(1B) of the Act was filed wherein the assessee categorically mentioned that the permanent established of the assessee

M/S RUNGTA CEMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shriwaseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.2257 To 2263/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2016-17) M/S Rungta Cements Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Room No.301, Mangalan Building, 24, Hemant Basu Sarani, Dalhousi, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr5445F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 08.08.2019Arising Penalty Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2016-17 U/S 271(1B)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing Of The Matter & Therefore We Have Heard The Ld. Dr & Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record Before Us. 3. The Imposition Of Penalty Of Rs.10,000/- U/S 271(1B) Of The Act Has Been Challenged By The Assessee For Non-Compliance Of The Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Dated 28.11.2017 As It Appears From The Record & Also Submitted By The Ld. Dr

penalty order u/s 271(1B) of the Act was filed wherein the assessee categorically mentioned that the permanent established of the assessee

M/S RUNGTA CEMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shriwaseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.2257 To 2263/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2016-17) M/S Rungta Cements Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Room No.301, Mangalan Building, 24, Hemant Basu Sarani, Dalhousi, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr5445F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 08.08.2019Arising Penalty Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2016-17 U/S 271(1B)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing Of The Matter & Therefore We Have Heard The Ld. Dr & Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record Before Us. 3. The Imposition Of Penalty Of Rs.10,000/- U/S 271(1B) Of The Act Has Been Challenged By The Assessee For Non-Compliance Of The Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Dated 28.11.2017 As It Appears From The Record & Also Submitted By The Ld. Dr

penalty order u/s 271(1B) of the Act was filed wherein the assessee categorically mentioned that the permanent established of the assessee

M/S RUNGTA CEMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shriwaseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.2257 To 2263/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2016-17) M/S Rungta Cements Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Room No.301, Mangalan Building, 24, Hemant Basu Sarani, Dalhousi, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccr5445F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 08.08.2019Arising Penalty Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2016-17 U/S 271(1B)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing Of The Matter & Therefore We Have Heard The Ld. Dr & Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record Before Us. 3. The Imposition Of Penalty Of Rs.10,000/- U/S 271(1B) Of The Act Has Been Challenged By The Assessee For Non-Compliance Of The Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Dated 28.11.2017 As It Appears From The Record & Also Submitted By The Ld. Dr

penalty order u/s 271(1B) of the Act was filed wherein the assessee categorically mentioned that the permanent established of the assessee

M/S VODAFONE EAST LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T RANGE - 7,KOL., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

271(1)(c ) of the Act that the aforesaid issues had reached the corridors of several tribunals and courts and that itself goes to prove that the issues are highly debatable and involves substantial question of law. Hence there cannot be any levy of penalty on a legal issue. I.T.A. No. 1864/KOL./2012 Assessment year: 2009-2010 & Assessment Year

M/S. TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),NADIA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2015-16, is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 15. The Assessee craves leave to add to and/ or amend, alter, modify or rescind the grounds hereinabove before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. From perusal of the above grounds, we find that ground nos. 1 & 2 are general in nature which need no adjudication. Further

M/S. TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),NADIA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2015-16, is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 15. The Assessee craves leave to add to and/ or amend, alter, modify or rescind the grounds hereinabove before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. From perusal of the above grounds, we find that ground nos. 1 & 2 are general in nature which need no adjudication. Further

DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. DDIT (IT)-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri N.V. Vasudevan & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

permanent establishment, then no income from offshore supply contract is taxable in India. Otherwise, only such part of profit as is reasonably attributable to the operation, relating offshore supply is carried out by the PE in India, is taxable in India. There would be no deduction of tax in respect of receipts from offshore supply, but the petitioner shall maintain

DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri N.V. Vasudevan & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

permanent establishment, then no income from offshore supply contract is taxable in India. Otherwise, only such part of profit as is reasonably attributable to the operation, relating offshore supply is carried out by the PE in India, is taxable in India. There would be no deduction of tax in respect of receipts from offshore supply, but the petitioner shall maintain

SAAB TECHNOLOGIES B.V.(FORMERLY KNOWN S ,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 153/KOL/2022 is allowed

Bench: Sri Anikesh Banerjee & Sri Girish Agrawal

u/s 288B 37,64,480 The order is made as above in terms of provisions of section 144C (I) of the Act. The assessee is entitled to tile its acceptance of the order in terms of clause (a) or file its objections in terms of clause (b) of section I44C (2). The final assessment order is to be passed thereafter

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.(HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCT LTD.,), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

271(1)(c) of the Act in the impugned order. Initiation of penalty proceedings is not an order imposing penalty and therefore does not come under the ambit of Section 246A of the Act meaning thereby that it is premature at this juncture. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is dismissed. 5.1 With regard to the ground

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.(HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCT LTD.,), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

271(1)(c) of the Act in the impugned order. Initiation of penalty proceedings is not an order imposing penalty and therefore does not come under the ambit of Section 246A of the Act meaning thereby that it is premature at this juncture. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is dismissed. 5.1 With regard to the ground

DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, II-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 196/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dongfang Electric Corporation.….…….………………………………………………………….……..Appellant Dongfang Electric Corporation Kolkata Project Office Ck-189 & Ck-141 Sector-Ii Salt Lake City Kolkata – 700 091. [Pan : Aaccd 0559 L] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-1(1), Kolkata…..Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Poorva 110 Shanti Pally Kolkata – 700 107 I.T.A. No. 295/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-1(1),Kolkata……….Appellant 110 Shanti Pally Kolkata – 700 107 Dongfang Electric Corporation.….…….……………………………………………………………….Respondent Dongfang Electric Corporation Kolkata Project Office Ck-189 & Ck-141 Sector-Ii Salt Lake City Kolkata – 700 091. [Pan : Aaccd 0559 L] Appearances By: Shri Nageswar Rao, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit, Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 04Th, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 09Th, 2017 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :- The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Directed Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer, Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153(1) & 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). The Revenue Has Filed A Cross-Appeal, Challenging The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Drp’).

permanent establishment, then no income from offshore supply contract is taxable in India.  Otherwise, only such part of profit as is reasonably attributable to the operation relating offshore supply is carried out by the PE in India is taxable in India. There would be no deduction of tax in respect of receipts from offshore supply, but the petitioner shall maintain

DCIT, (IT), CIR-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THE DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey] I.T.A. No. 196/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dongfang Electric Corporation.….…….………………………………………………………….……..Appellant Dongfang Electric Corporation Kolkata Project Office Ck-189 & Ck-141 Sector-Ii Salt Lake City Kolkata – 700 091. [Pan : Aaccd 0559 L] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-1(1), Kolkata…..Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Poorva 110 Shanti Pally Kolkata – 700 107 I.T.A. No. 295/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-1(1),Kolkata……….Appellant 110 Shanti Pally Kolkata – 700 107 Dongfang Electric Corporation.….…….……………………………………………………………….Respondent Dongfang Electric Corporation Kolkata Project Office Ck-189 & Ck-141 Sector-Ii Salt Lake City Kolkata – 700 091. [Pan : Aaccd 0559 L] Appearances By: Shri Nageswar Rao, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit, Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 04Th, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 09Th, 2017 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :- The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Directed Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer, Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153(1) & 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). The Revenue Has Filed A Cross-Appeal, Challenging The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Drp’).

permanent establishment, then no income from offshore supply contract is taxable in India.  Otherwise, only such part of profit as is reasonably attributable to the operation relating offshore supply is carried out by the PE in India is taxable in India. There would be no deduction of tax in respect of receipts from offshore supply, but the petitioner shall maintain