DCIT, CIR-3(2), GANGTOK, AAYAKAR BHAWAN BHANUPATH ROAD NEAR WHITE HALL GANGTOK vs. HEINZ INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, SIKKIM

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

deduction claimed u/s 80IC to Rs.102,02,10,934/- as against claim of Rs.102,80,88,016/-. While initiating the reassessment

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOLKATA - 2, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1136/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Mcleod Russel India Limited, Vs Pr.Cit, Kolkata-2 Four Mangoe Lane, Surendra Mohan Ghosh Sarani, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. :Aaace 6918 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri N.S.Saini, Ar & Ms. Priyanka Salarpuria, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.03.2024, Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Kolkata-2, U/S.263 Of The Act For The Assessment Year 2015-2016 On The Following Grounds :- 1. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Pr. Cit Has Erred In Passing The Order U/S 263 By Invoking Of Section 263 Of The Act, Although The Assessment Order Passed U/S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I. T. Act, 1961 Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue. 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Reassessment Order For A.Y. 2015-16 Which Is Sought To Be Revised By The Ld. Pcit U/S 263 Had Neither Considered The Issue Of Eligibility For Deduction U/S 801E Of The 1.T. Act In The Reassessment Proceedings Nor The Reopening Of The Assessment Made On That Ground. Therefore, The Issue Does Not Arise Out Of The Order Passed U/S 147 Of The 1.T. Act, 1961. 3. For That On The Facts Of The Case & Law, The Issue Of Notice U/S 263 Of The Act On The Ground That The Assessee Company

reassessment order for A.Y. 2015-16 which is sought to be revised by the Ld. PCIT u/s 263 had neither considered the issue of eligibility for deduction

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

reassessment was any issue raised or decided in respect of the deductions under section 36(1)(vii), (viia) and the foreign

ZULU MERCHANDISE (P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT 2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

reassessment was any issue raised or decided in respect of the deductions under section 36(1)(vii), (viia) and the foreign

SUNBLAZE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 9(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 9(1) Sunblaze Constructions Pvt. Ltd. 164/1, Maniktala Main Road, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Kankurgachi, S.O. Kolkata- Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Vs. 700054, West Bengal 700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aascs7903D Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Puja Somani, Ars Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.01.2026

reassessment regime. The extended period of limitation available by virtue of taxation and other laws (deduction and amendment of certain

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

reassess such income or recomputed the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

reassess such income or recomputed the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

reassess such income or recomputed the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment

ARISTOCRAT RESIDENCES LLP ,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 34 (1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Income Tax Officer, Ward Aristocrat Residences Llp 34(1) 2 Oswal Chambers Church Lane Aaykar Bhavan, Bbd Bagh, Kolkata-700001 Vs. Kolkata-700107 West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aavfa9997R Assessee By : Dr. Kapil Goel, Ar Revenue By : H. Robindro Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2025

deduction, allowance or relief in the return; (d) where a person is found to have any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India. Explanation 3.-For the purpose of assessment or reassessment

INTERNATIONAL SEAPORT (HALDIA) PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, -2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm International Seaport (Haldia) Pvt. Ltd. Pcit, 2 C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Advocates, 2 Garstin Place, 2 Nd Chowringhee Square, Vs. Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Street, Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci9468D Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri S. Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2026

deduction In accordance with the requirements of Schedule II to the Companies Act, 2013, the Company reassessed the remaining useful

SURESH KUMAR PODDAR,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 63(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

deduction, allowance or relief in the return; (d) where a person is found to have any asset (including financial in- terest in any entity) located outside India. 8 Suresh Kumar Poddar Explanation 3.-For the purpose of assessment or reassessmentunder this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess

THE DCIT, CIR-3(2) GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED , GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment under Section 147/148 of the Act also becomes academic once the conclusion is arrived at that the deduction under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR-3(2), GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED, GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment under Section 147/148 of the Act also becomes academic once the conclusion is arrived at that the deduction under

AMBUJA NEOTIA HEALTHCARE VENTURE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-11(1), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 Ambuja Neotia Healthcare Deputy Commissioner Of Venture Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-11(1), Vs. 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia, Kolkata. Kolkata-700046. (Pan: Aaccn4806C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

deduction to the assessee u/s 35AD of the Act. This ground is, accordingly, allowed in favour of the assessee. 14. In view of this, the legal grounds relating to the reassessment

AMBUJA NEOTIA HEALTHCARE VENTURE LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos.237&238/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ambuja Neotia Healthcare Venture Ltd...….........................……...…..….. Appellant 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia, Kolkata-700046. [Pan: Aaccn4806C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..................................….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 05, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 06.03.2023 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’). Since Common Issues Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.237/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.237/Kol/2023 – The Sole Issue Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Is Relating To Disallowance Of Rs.7,73,14 356/- U/S 35Ad Being Capital Expenditure Incurred For The Purpose Of Specified Business.

deduction to the assessee u/s 35AD of the Act. This ground is, accordingly, allowed in favour of the assessee. 14. In view of this, the legal grounds relating to the reassessment

AMBUJA NEOTIA HEALTHCARE VENTURE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1). , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos.237&238/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ambuja Neotia Healthcare Venture Ltd...….........................……...…..….. Appellant 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia, Kolkata-700046. [Pan: Aaccn4806C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..................................….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 05, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 06.03.2023 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’). Since Common Issues Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.237/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.237/Kol/2023 – The Sole Issue Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Is Relating To Disallowance Of Rs.7,73,14 356/- U/S 35Ad Being Capital Expenditure Incurred For The Purpose Of Specified Business.

deduction to the assessee u/s 35AD of the Act. This ground is, accordingly, allowed in favour of the assessee. 14. In view of this, the legal grounds relating to the reassessment

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG)(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment of income- tax. 21. At this stage, it is pertinent to mention here, that it is not all type of taxes that are not allowable as deduction

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG) (P)LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment of income- tax. 21. At this stage, it is pertinent to mention here, that it is not all type of taxes that are not allowable as deduction