SATYA HARI SAMUI,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 46(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

112 [PAN: ALAPS 2193 R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,...........................................................Respondent Ward-46(4), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700 001 Appearances by: N o n e, for the Appellant Shri Shankar Kumar Halder, JCIT, Sr. D.R., for the Respondent Date of concluding the hearing : January 30, 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : January

SHRI SHYAMAL GOPAL CHATTOPADHYAY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, 2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

112/- was added under the head salary income and the same was treated as concealed income of the assessee and initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO found that the assessee had a short term capital gain of Rs.7,33,910/-. On being asked, the Ld. AR could

M/S. SNOWTEX INVESTMENT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 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.1347/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Snowtex Investment Ltd. -Vs.- Ito, Wd-12(3), Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaecs 0334 C ] (Appellant) (Respondent) : Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate For The Appellant For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01/2018 Order Per Dr. A.L. Saini, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.04.2016 Of Cit(A)-4, Kolkata Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Order Of Cit(A) Whereby The Cit(A) Confirmed The Order Of Ao Imposing Penalty On The Assessee U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act). 3. The Facts & Circumstances Under Which Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act Was Imposed On The Assessee Was That During The Assessment Year 2008-09, The Assessee Has Advanced Interest Free Loans To The Extent Of Rs.9,58,95,000/- & As There Had Been No Significant Repayment, The Closing Balance As On 31.03.2008 Was At Rs. 9,62,95,000/-. It Was Also Seen From The Details For A.Y. 2009-10, That There Had Been No Business Transactions Apart From Interest Free Loan Transactions. The Unsecured Loans On Which Interest Was Paid, Was Rs. 5,92,05,572/-, Which Was Much Below The Amount, Which Was Advanced By The Assessee Free Of Any Interest. Therefore, There Had Been No Justification Of Unsecured Loan Taken During The Year. Therefore, Whole Sum Of Interest Paid Of Rs. 62,84,112/- Was Disallowed. The Cit(A) Restricted The M/S. Snowtex Investment Ltd.

112/- was disallowed. The CIT(A) restricted the M/s. Snowtex Investment Ltd. I.T.A No.1347/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 2 disallowance of Rs.21,44,241/- on this issue. The assessing officer has observed that there was concealment of income to the extent of Rs.21,44,241/- and imposed penalty under section 271(1) (c ) of the Act. The assessing officer also

M/S. PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO - 8(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

112/-. As declared in the said return, the assessee-company had entered into the following international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AE) during the year under consideration:- 1. 47.87 crores TNMM & CUP Import of equipment and spares (after set off of a credit note received of Rs.11.87 crores on account of transfer pricing adjustment. 2. Commission income earned 3.73 crores

DCIT RG 8(2), MUMBAI vs. PHILLIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD ( FORMLERY KNOWN AS PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEM INDIA P.LTD),

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

112/-. As declared in the said return, the assessee-company had entered into the following international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AE) during the year under consideration:- 1. 47.87 crores TNMM & CUP Import of equipment and spares (after set off of a credit note received of Rs.11.87 crores on account of transfer pricing adjustment. 2. Commission income earned 3.73 crores

ACIT - 8(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS INDIA P. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

112/-. As declared in the said return, the assessee-company had entered into the following international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AE) during the year under consideration:- 1. 47.87 crores TNMM & CUP Import of equipment and spares (after set off of a credit note received of Rs.11.87 crores on account of transfer pricing adjustment. 2. Commission income earned 3.73 crores

SRI MANISH MUNDRA,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T CC - XXX,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

penalty u/s 271(1) of the Act imposed on the assessee by the AO are as follows :- The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2003-04 & 2004-05 disclosing total income of Rs. 8,43,300/- (including LTCG of Rs. 6,62,942/-) and Rs.l3,35,401/- (including Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) of Rs.9

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (IT) - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the Ground Nos. (iv) to (vi) raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 503/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 505/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. -Vs- Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

112 (Guj) • CIT v. Akkem Labomtories (P.) Ltd.. [2009] 314 ITR 329 (Pat) • CIT vs Hindustan Motors Ltd 175 ITR 411 (Cal); • CIT vs. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Gui), • CIT v Punjab Financial Corporation Ltd., 295 ITR 510 (P&H); • Decom Marketing Pvt. Ltd vs CIT 251 ITR 398 (Guj); • CIT vs Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel Tobacco

DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V., KOLKATA

Accordingly, the Ground Nos. (iv) to (vi) raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 503/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 505/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. -Vs- Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

112 (Guj) • CIT v. Akkem Labomtories (P.) Ltd.. [2009] 314 ITR 329 (Pat) • CIT vs Hindustan Motors Ltd 175 ITR 411 (Cal); • CIT vs. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Gui), • CIT v Punjab Financial Corporation Ltd., 295 ITR 510 (P&H); • Decom Marketing Pvt. Ltd vs CIT 251 ITR 398 (Guj); • CIT vs Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel Tobacco

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 36 & 1885/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. -Vs- Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

112 (Guj) • CIT v. Akkem Labomtories (P.) Ltd.. [2009] 314 ITR 329 (Pat) • CIT vs Hindustan Motors Ltd 175 ITR 411 (Cal); • CIT vs. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Gui), • CIT v Punjab Financial Corporation Ltd., 295 ITR 510 (P&H); 7 M/s Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. A.Yrs. 2012-13 & 2013-14 • Decom Marketing

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 36 & 1885/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. -Vs- Dcit (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 6818 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

112 (Guj) • CIT v. Akkem Labomtories (P.) Ltd.. [2009] 314 ITR 329 (Pat) • CIT vs Hindustan Motors Ltd 175 ITR 411 (Cal); • CIT vs. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd. 200 ITR 281 (Gui), • CIT v Punjab Financial Corporation Ltd., 295 ITR 510 (P&H); 7 M/s Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. A.Yrs. 2012-13 & 2013-14 • Decom Marketing

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

112 taxmann.com 322 (SC) has held that disallowances u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income of relevant year. The appellant has stated that since the assessee company has earned exempt income to the tune of Rs. 8,774/- in the relevant year. Therefore, the addition made on account of disallowances u/s 14A is to be restricted

BALHANUMAN COMMODEAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(4), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I. T. Act, 1961 has been initiated against the assessee on this point for concealing the particulars of income and furnishing Inaccurate particulars of income. 5. It is found that the assessee has shown Rs. 14,00,000/- as current investments in equity as on 31.03.2012. No such is found

ACIT, CIRCLE-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. G. D. CONSTRUCTION & CO., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11

271(1)(b) of the Act in the event of non appearance of assessee on the date of hearing despite the fact that notices for hearing were sent to him. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that no penalty of whatsoever has been initiated by the AO. We also observed that the AO has not initiated penalty

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

penalty under section 271(1)(c) is also initiated. As discussed in the foregoing paragraphs, the assessee had arranged pre- arranged accommodation entries to the tune of Rs. 63,76,486/- through the entry operators who facilitates such accommodation entry on receipt of commission only. As reported by the Investigation Directorate, the entry operators charge a commission

DCIT, CC-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. P & P HIGHRISE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is initiated separately. Issue necessary forms, demand notice, penalty notice and copy of order to the assessee Give credit to prepaid taxes. Computation of tax is enclosed winch is an integral part of this order. (SANJAY JHA) ACIT, CC-1(2), KOLKATA” 5. While impugning this finding, the assessee contended before

DDIT(IT)-1(1)KOL, KOLKATA vs. M/S JOY PARTNERSHIP, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 149/Kol/2009 Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ddit(It)-1(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Joy Partnership [Pan: Aadfj 6427 H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is, therefore, initiated separately for disallowance of Rs.l,89,41,265/- . 4.3. The amount of exchange loss of Rs. 51,69,208/- is inclusive of Rs. 13,98,364/- in respect of which the assessee was able to identify the employees. The balance of Rs. 37,70,844/-(5169208-1398364) is purely an estimated

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

Penalty proceeding u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is initi- ated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. [Addition: 1,44,77,042/-] Tata Consumer Products Ltd. {erstwhile Tata Global Beverages Ltd.} AYs: 2014-15 & 2015-16 6.1 The Ld. TPO had proposed the adjustment at 200 bps after detailed analysis of the Transfer Pricing Study Report filed