M/S. PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED (SUCCESSOR TO ERSTWHILE PHILIPS SOFTWARE CENTRE PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T. (TRANSFER PRICING) - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 32 & 33/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. Philips India Limited Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax 3Rd Floor, Tower A Vs (Transfer Pricing-Ii), Bangalore [Presently Deputy Dlf Park, 08 Block Af Commissioner/Assistant Major Arterial Road Commissioner Of Income-Tax New Town Transfer Pricing 2, Kolkata Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aabcp9487A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan K. Ved, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Even Dt. 15/11/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. The Sole Issue Raised In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Maintainability Of The Appeals Before The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Rectification Orders Passed By The Transfer Pricing Officer (In Short “Tpo”) U/S 154 R.W. Sub-Section (5) To Section 92Ca Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(A) Vide Impugned Orders Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee Holding That As Per The Provisions Of Section 246A Of The Act, Order U/S 92Ca Or Its Rectification Order U/S 154 Of The Act Passed By The Tpo Is 2

u/s 92CA(3) of the Act for the purpose of rectification of any mistake apparent from record in such order and the provisions of Section 154 will accordingly apply. Sub- Section (5), therefore, specifically provides that the provisions of Section 154 of the Act will be applicable for the purpose of amendment of TP adjustment order passed

MSTC LTD,KOLKATA vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, CIR-1(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2021-22

rectification u/s 154 before AO were filed and were/are pending disposal before the order u/s 143(3) was passed. 9. For that without prejudice to any other ground taken, the Ld. CIT(A) erred both in law and in the facts and circumstances of the case to not have appropriately dealt with fact in his order, that the AO acted

ITO, WARD - 3(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CHITRAVALI SALES (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

rectification proceedings u/s 154 of the Act while granting credit of TCS. (m) Even in respect of advance received from Mr Jaykant in the sum of Rs. 49,000/- who had not confirmed before the ld AO of having transaction with the assessee, the assessee had duly supplied sand to him in the subsequent year and sales have been booked

SUNIL AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shris.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Dr.A.L. Saini, Hon’Ble

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 28.10.2014 &05.05.2016, which in turn arise out of the orders passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act, both dated 26.03.2013 respectively. Sunil Agarwal A.Y. 10-11 2. This caption appeals filed by the assessee pertains to same Assessment Year, same assessee, common issue

UNICORN DEALTRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE (CPC), , BENGALURU

Appeal are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

68,939 was shown in the total column\ninstead of the gross income and the corresponding loss being shown\nseparately.\nFiling of Rectification under Section 154:\nRealizing the clerical mistake, the appellant filed a rectification request\nunder Section 154 of the Act on 03.01.2020. In this request, the appellant\ncorrectly reported the derivative income of ₹1,13,89,679 under

M/S SKIPPER LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

rectification order u/s 154 of the Act dated 09.07.2018. The facts are that an addition of Rs. 3,00,40,000/- u/s 68 of the Act was made to the income of the assessee in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) read with Section

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. LALBABA SEAMLESS TUBES PVT. LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.58/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

68 for the A.Y. 2014-15 was not accepted and hence assessee’s petition was rejected. M/s Lalbaba Seamless Tubes Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2014-15 Being aggrieved the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A)-1,Kolkata against rejecting the application for rectification u/s. 154 of the I.T. Act. Ld. CIT(A), Kolkata passed order dated 05.10.2018 vide

BIDYUT PRAKAS BHATTACHARYA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 52(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

rectification under section 154. The CPC, Bengaluru had wrongly calculated tax on its entire tax liability which is unsustainable and bad in law. As a consequence, it has resulted into impugned levy of interest under section 234C amounting to Rs. 32,317 which is consequential in nature. In view of above, the impugned levy of interest under section 234C amounting

NARAYAN BARTER PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-6(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

u/s 68 of the Act, the assessee had contended that this was not a case of fresh credits and the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit was erroneous and the transactions merely involved conversion of one current asset into another and as ITA No(s). 2572/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2011-12 Narayan Barter Private Limited. such provisions related

UNIVERSAL TRADING COMPANY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

rectification application u/s 154 of the Act to rectify this mistake, which was rejected by the CPC. On appeal, the assessee pointed out to the Ld. CIT(A) that, the CPC apparently allowed MAT credit only for the income tax component and had ignored the education cess. The relevant calculation mistake committed by the CPC is as follows: Particulars

EUREKA FORBES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RG-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 239/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Eureka Forbes Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Range-10, Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 5767 F ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

rectification notice issued u/s 154 by the Department & the petition· The appellant made u/s 154 of the Act. However, on perusal of the details' of 'investment in shares from the Audited Balance sheets (Schedule E), it reveals that in the 'instant assessment year, there is an increase in the investment in shares of Rs. 3,91,97,450/- as compared

TIRUPATI TIMBERS & PACKAGING P. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 4(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1428/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Tirupati Timbers & Packaging P. Limited,…Appellant Room No. 563, Marshall House, 33/1, N.S. Road, Dalhousie, G.P.O., Kolkata-700001, W.B. [Pan:Aabct2720Q] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 8Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Girdhar Dhelia, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 20, 2025 O R D E R

154 of the Act, and the rectification has been rejected on flimsy grounds on 06.06.2025, i.e. after the limitation period of two months from the end of the month in which the order u/s. 250 was passed, which was beyond the control of the management. Against Defect No.1 of the notice issued that appeal fee not filed as others

ELLENBARRIE INDUSTRIAL GASES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is allowed, and ground

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1687/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ellenbarrie Industrial Gases Vs. Ito, Ward-8(2), Kolkata Ltd. 34, Ripon Street, Kolkata – 700016. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaace 5770 E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri A.K. Bandyopadhyay, Fca Respondent By :Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit(Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/02/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-16, Kolkata, In Appeal No.352/Cit(A)-16/Kol/2014-15/W-8(2), Dated 13.07.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S154/143(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 16-04-2009. 2.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Lncome Tax (Appeals)- 16, To The Extent That He Has Confirmed The Order Of Ld. Lncome Tax Officer Ward 8(2) Kolkata, Is Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Lncome Tax (Appeals)-16 Had Ignored The Fact That Assessed Tax For The Purpose Of Section 234B & 234C Of The Lncome Tax Act 1961 Was Computed Without Considering Available Mat Credit Of Rs.12,91,616/-Upto The Assessment Year 2006-2007. Computation Of Lnterest Under Section 234B & 234C Was Not Made In Accordance With Explanation 1(V) To Sub-Section (1) Of Section 234B & 234C Of Lncome Tax Act 1961;

rectification application of the assessee and computed the tax payable as under: Total income as per order u/s 143(1) 17.03.2009 NIL Tax @ 10% of book profit Rs.61,22,210/- Surcharge @ 10% Rs.6,12,221/- Education Cess @ 2% Rs.1,34,689/- Total Tax Payable Rs.68,69,120/- Less: T.D.S Rs.4,35,927/- Rs.64,33,193/- Add: Interest u/s 234B Rs.5

MADHUBAN DEALERS PVT. LTD. PRESENTLY KNOWN AS MADHUBAN DEALERS LLP,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-13, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

68 of the Act which was replied on 18.03.2019 in which it was pointed out that the information did not pertain to AY 2010-11 but to AY 11-12. It was also stated before the AO that AY 2011-12 was reopened and after necessary verification, the assessment was framed u/s. 143(3)/147

M/S. INDIAN ROADWAYS CORPORATION LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL - 1, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. Principal Commissioner Of M/S Indian Roadways Corporation Ltd. Income Tax, Central-I, Irc House, 1, Sunyat Sen Street, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Kolkata-700012. Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci 7333 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

rectification is done u/s 154 or the order is revised u/s 263. The main purpose of these provisions is to safeguard the interest of revenue by making necessary correction in the assessment passed by the AO. As this mistake is admittedly correct, therefore, the AO was rightly directed by the Pr.CIT, to add the amount of Rs. 10 lakh

ACS TRADERS (P) LTD.,HOWRAH vs. PCIT-5, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

154 of the Act (rectification of mistake) on 06.04.2016. Thereafter the assessee’s case was reopened by the AO u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 28.03.2017 by recording reasons on that date which fact is noticed from the order sheet placed at page 100 of PB. It is noted that the reasons

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PRAKASH PLY CENTRE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is assessee is allowed”

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiit(Ss)A No.24-25/Kol/2017 &

154 seeking rectification of the assessments on the ground that the accumulated profits of the companies paying the dividend were less than the amount of loan or advance given by them to the recipient companies- AO declined to rectify the assessments-CIT also held that addition need not be restricted only to the seized material-ITAT on appeal however deleted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PRAKASH PLY CENTRE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is assessee is allowed”

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiit(Ss)A No.24-25/Kol/2017 &

154 seeking rectification of the assessments on the ground that the accumulated profits of the companies paying the dividend were less than the amount of loan or advance given by them to the recipient companies- AO declined to rectify the assessments-CIT also held that addition need not be restricted only to the seized material-ITAT on appeal however deleted

SUVODEEP PYNE,GARIA vs. ITO, WARD 63(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2251&2252/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Suvodeep Pyne…………………..…..……….………….……….……….……Appellant Castle Apt 3B, 129, Garia Main Road, Kamdahari, Garia S.O, W.B-700084.. [Pan: Bbypp8655C] Vs. Ito, Ward-63(1), Kolkata……………………………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Pratim Dutta, Adv. & Sanjana Jha, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S B Chakraborthy, Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 04, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2020-21 Against Separate Orders Both Dated 09.08.2025 Of The Addl/Jcit(A) Kochi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2251/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. Ita No.2251/Kol/2025 – Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In This 2. Case, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Fy-2017-18, Relevant To The A.Y- 2018-19 On 29.08.2018 By Disclosing Gross Total Income Of Rs. 68,85,998/- & Claimed Deduction A Sum Of Ra.7,455/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Disclosed Income From Salary Of

68,85,998/- and claimed deduction a sum of Ra.7,455/-. During the year under consideration, the assessee disclosed Income from salary of ITA Nos.2251&2252/Kol/2025 Suvodeep Pyne Rs. 25,33,828/-, short term gain a sum of Rs.37,29,453/-, long term capital gain a sum of Rs. 5,71,973/- and the total Capital gain was shown