ACIT, CIRCLE - 56, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THE WEST BENGAL STATE CO-OPT. BANK LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals as well as the cross-objections are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.Anos.737-742/Kol/2011 Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 2001-02 A.C.I.T., Circle-56, -Vs.- The West Bengal State Co-Operative Kolkata Bank Ltd.Kolkata [Pan : Aaaat 7072 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) C.O.Nos.36-40/Kol/2011 (A/O I.T.A Nos. 737-741/Kol/2011 ) Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 2000-2001 The West Bengal State Co-Operative -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-56, Bank Ltd., Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaat 7072 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri N.C.Mondal, Ca Date Of Hearing : 27.07.2016. Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2016. Order Per Bench

D ‘Bench, Kolkata by order dt. 29.02.2008 for A.Ys.2002-03 to 2004-05 the Tribunal held that similar interest income disputed by the AO as not eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2) (a)(i) of the Act, was eligible for such deduction. The following were the relevant observations of the ITAT in the aforesaid order: “9. On consideration

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

80P(2)(d) of the Act is a debatable matter as the issue went up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same has also been deleted in the quantum appeal, as mentioned by the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, it cannot be said that the assessee had under-reported the income without there being a reasonable cause

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

reassess the company's income, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the company as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same and on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was correct and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal. Therefore

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

PURULIA CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. ,PURULIA vs. ACIT, CIR. 3, PURULIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

D E R Per Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Asansol dated 4th February, 2020 passed for A.Y. 2006-07. 1 Purulia Central Cooperative Bank Limited 2 The appeal was received before the Tribunal on 13th January, 2021. The period