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]

u/s 264 contains the summary, which is identical in both the order. The summary is reproduced below: "8. To sum up OffShore supply Profit from offshore supply of equipment/machinery is deemed to accrue or arise to the petitioner under Indian Income tax Act, as it has arisen to the petitioner through or from business connection in India. Only such part

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]

u/s 264 contains the summary, which is identical in both the order. The summary is reproduced below: "8. To sum up OffShore supply Profit from offshore supply of equipment/machinery is deemed to accrue or arise to the petitioner under Indian Income tax Act, as it has arisen to the petitioner through or from business connection in India. Only such part

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’).

u/s 92CA(3) of the Act, dt. 30/01/2017, has determined that “assessee company should have earned a profit Rs.5,92,36,331/-, instead of –Nil- return filed by the assessee. The DRP, partly upheld the order of the TPO. The Assessing Officer passed this final assessment order, in accordance with the directions of the DRP determining the total income

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’).

u/s 92CA(3) of the Act, dt. 30/01/2017, has determined that “assessee company should have earned a profit Rs.5,92,36,331/-, instead of –Nil- return filed by the assessee. The DRP, partly upheld the order of the TPO. The Assessing Officer passed this final assessment order, in accordance with the directions of the DRP determining the total income

M/S. ULTRATECH NATHDWARA CEMENT LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. BINANI CEMENT LTD.,),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. 6. The appellant craves leave of your Honour to add to, alter, amend and/or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.” III. ITA No. 611/KOL/2015; ; A.Y. 2010-11: (1) That on the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ULTRATECH NATHDWARA CEMENT LTD. (KNOWN AS M/S. BINANI CEMENT LTD.), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. 6. The appellant craves leave of your Honour to add to, alter, amend and/or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.” III. ITA No. 611/KOL/2015; ; A.Y. 2010-11: (1) That on the facts and circumstances of the case

ACIT, CIR-14(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ULTRATECH NATHDWARA CEMENT LTD.(KNOWN AS M/S BINANI CEMENT LTD.), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. 6. The appellant craves leave of your Honour to add to, alter, amend and/or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.” III. ITA No. 611/KOL/2015; ; A.Y. 2010-11: (1) That on the facts and circumstances of the case

BINANI CEMENT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-XXVIII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. 6. The appellant craves leave of your Honour to add to, alter, amend and/or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.” III. ITA No. 611/KOL/2015; ; A.Y. 2010-11: (1) That on the facts and circumstances of the case

ACIT, CC-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HARIRAM JAGDISH PRASAD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1483/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1484/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1485/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 I.T.A. No. 1486/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.A. No. 1487/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. 7. Subject to above discussion, the total income of the assessee is computed as follows:- Computation of Total Income:- Income as per return Rs. 34,013/- Add:- Undisclosed working capital (As discussed in para-6) Rs.3,17,30,247/- Total income:- Rs.3,17,64,260/- Calculation

ACIT, CC-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HARIRAM JAGDISH PRASAD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1483/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1484/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1485/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 I.T.A. No. 1486/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.A. No. 1487/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. 7. Subject to above discussion, the total income of the assessee is computed as follows:- Computation of Total Income:- Income as per return Rs. 34,013/- Add:- Undisclosed working capital (As discussed in para-6) Rs.3,17,30,247/- Total income:- Rs.3,17,64,260/- Calculation

ACIT, CC-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HARIRAM JAGDISH PRASAD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1483/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1484/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1485/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 I.T.A. No. 1486/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.A. No. 1487/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. 7. Subject to above discussion, the total income of the assessee is computed as follows:- Computation of Total Income:- Income as per return Rs. 34,013/- Add:- Undisclosed working capital (As discussed in para-6) Rs.3,17,30,247/- Total income:- Rs.3,17,64,260/- Calculation

ACIT, CC-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HARIRAM JAGDISH PRASAD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1483/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1484/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1485/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 I.T.A. No. 1486/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.A. No. 1487/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. 7. Subject to above discussion, the total income of the assessee is computed as follows:- Computation of Total Income:- Income as per return Rs. 34,013/- Add:- Undisclosed working capital (As discussed in para-6) Rs.3,17,30,247/- Total income:- Rs.3,17,64,260/- Calculation

ACIT, CC-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HARIRAM JAGDISH PRASAD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1483/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1484/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1485/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 I.T.A. No. 1486/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.A. No. 1487/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. 7. Subject to above discussion, the total income of the assessee is computed as follows:- Computation of Total Income:- Income as per return Rs. 34,013/- Add:- Undisclosed working capital (As discussed in para-6) Rs.3,17,30,247/- Total income:- Rs.3,17,64,260/- Calculation

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

928 of the Act. 1.2. disregarding the fact that the provision of corporate guarantee to the AEs was for the purpose of furtherance of business by the Appellant, and consequently the guarantee was in the nature of shareholder services and thus a guarantee fee is not warranted. 1.3. making an ad-hoc adjustment of 200 basis points on the outstanding

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

928 of the Act. 1.2. disregarding the fact that the provision of corporate guarantee to the AEs was for the purpose of furtherance of business by the Appellant, and consequently the guarantee was in the nature of shareholder services and thus a guarantee fee is not warranted. 1.3. making an ad-hoc adjustment of 200 basis points on the outstanding

EQUITABLE MARKETING ASSOCIATION,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-30, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.1226/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Equitable Marketing Association…………………… ........................……Appellant 82, Baburam Ghosh Road, Tollygunge, Kolkata – 700040. [Pan: Aaaae0345D] Vs. Acit, Circle-30, Kolkata…...................…................…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. S. Gupta, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 10, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 07, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.09.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That The Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Is Arbitrary, Bad In Law & Facts & The Ld. Cit(A), Erred In Confirming The Same In Part. 2. That The Ld. A.O Erred In Making An Addition Of Rs.1,36,67,806/- By Invoking Sec. 50C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Same In As Much As In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case No Such Addition U/S 50C Was At All Called For.

928/-, 5. That the Ld. AO erred in law as well as in facts in levying/charging interest U/s 234B at Rs.15,40,638/- and interest U/s 234D at Rs.1,32,706/-, in as much as in view of the facts and circumstances of the case no such interests were at all chargeable. 6. That the Ld. AO has erred

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. DREAM BAKE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

271 (1)(c) of IT Act, 1961 has been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. " 6.2. The Assessee has made detailed submission. Some of which is reproduced as below: "3.2 It is humbly submitted that the appellant company maintains a running account in respect of Switz Foods wherein the expenses incurred on regular basis along with business advances