ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD., KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

115J and 115JA are special provisions. Section 207 envisages that tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year on current income in accordance with the scheme provided in sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive) in respect of the total income of the assessee that would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following that

M/S VODAFONE EAST LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

115J and 115JA are special provisions. Section 207 envisages that tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year on current income in accordance with the scheme provided in sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive) in respect of the total income of the assessee that would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following that

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. HUTCHISON TELECOM EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

115J and 115JA are special provisions. Section 207 envisages that tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year on current income in accordance with the scheme provided in sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive) in respect of the total income of the assessee that would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following that

DCIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

115J and 115JA are special provisions. Section 207 envisages that tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year on current income in accordance with the scheme provided in sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive) in respect of the total income of the assessee that would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following that

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

115J and 115JA are special provisions. Section 207 envisages that tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year on current income in accordance with the scheme provided in sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive) in respect of the total income of the assessee that would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following that

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

115J and 115JA are special provisions. Section 207 envisages that tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year on current income in accordance with the scheme provided in sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive) in respect of the total income of the assessee that would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following that

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

115J and 115JA are special provisions. Section 207 envisages that tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year on current income in accordance with the scheme provided in sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive) in respect of the total income of the assessee that would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following that

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

115J and 115JA are special provisions. Section 207 envisages that tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year on current income in accordance with the scheme provided in sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive) in respect of the total income of the assessee that would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following that

DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GLOSTER JUTE MILLS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.95/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08

68,895/-. This amount admittedly was credited in the profit and loss account. According to the AO, the aforesaid sum had to be included as part of the book profits u/s 115JB of the Act as it is not one of the item of income which has to be excluded from the net profit as per profit and loss account

ACIT, CIRCLE - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WILLIAMSON MAGOR & COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal and the assessee’s cross

68,64,159/- u/s 14A of the Act. He computed book profits u/s 115JB of the Act at Rs.20,69,62,805/-. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. First Appellate Authority granted relief by deleting the addition u/s 14A of the Act. While doing so, he followed the judgement of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court

M/S. HIMADRI CHEMICALS & INDUSTRIES LTD., (NOW KNOWN AS HIMADRI SPECIALITY CHEMICAL LTD.),KOLKATA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Aby. T. Varkey & Shri M. Balaganeshi.T.A. No.819/Kol/2017 (Assessment Year 2011-12) M/S. Himadri Chemicals & Pcit, Central-1, Kolkata. Industries Ltd. -Vs- [Now Known As Himadri Specialty Chemical Ltd.] [Pan :Aaach 7475 H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) For The Appellant Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate For The Respondent Dr. P. K. Srihari, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 05.04.2019

68,73,155/-. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 27.03.2015 determining total income of Rs.61,66,77,310/- under normal provisions of the Act. In the said assessment, disallowance u/s 14A of the Act was made to the tune of Rs.99,658/- and adjustment to arm’s length price as proposed by the ld. Transfer

LMJ INTERNATIONAL LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

68,38,770/- and Rs.5,04,44,366/- were claimed by the assessee under sections 80IA and 80IB of the Act respectively. During the course of assessment proceedings, the claim of the assessee for the said deductions was examined by the Assessing Officer and on such examination, he found that the assessee had claimed deduction under section 80IA

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;

115J of the Act, whereas the assessee company was liable to pay tax u/s 115JB of the Act. Section 115JB had been introduced by Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f.01.04.2001 and by an amendment by Finance Act, 2000, the book profit is deemed to be the total income of the assessee. In this respect, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court

ITO, WD-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. GANESHKA KANOI TEA CO PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

68,967/- for exemption on account of composite income to Rs.40,14,269/-. 3. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) challenging the computation of book profit under section 115JB as made by the Assessing Officer and after considering the submissions

M/S MEDI DRIPS CARRIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward-12(4), 8Th Floor, R.No.818, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4, Synagogue Street, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm 8139 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Rustogi, Aca Revenue By : Shri Saurav Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.490/Xii/12(4)/10-11, Dated 11.11.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.12.2010. 2. The Said Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By Four Days. The Assessee Filed The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Expressed The Reasons Of Delay. After Verification Of Petition We Found That There Was A Reasonable Cause For Four Days Delay In Filing The Appeal. Even Ld Dr Did Not Object To Condone The Delay. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2008. Subsequently The 2 M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. Assessee Company Filed Its Revised Return Of Income On 9-12-2008

section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the assessee, as the addition was due to retrospective adjustment and did not reflect book profit for the particular year. In addition to this, the ld. AR for the assessee has relied on the following judgments :- i)Gilt Pack Ltd., 163 Taxman 331 ( MP-HC) “It was observed that

D,C,I.T, CIR-I, KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. M/S STEWARTS & LLOYDS OF INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1515/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Dcit, Circle – 1, Kolkata...................................………………………….................................Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds Of India Ltd.....................……………………………….............Respondent 41, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 071. [Pan: Aaecs 0445 G] Appearances By: Shri C.J. Singh, Sr. Dr (Jcit) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. None Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 18, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 22, 2019 Order Per P.M. Jagtapthis Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 20, Kolkata Dated 21.02.2013. 2. At The Time Of Hearing Fixed On 18.03.2019, None Has Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee In Spite Of The Fact That The Notice Of The Said Hearing Was Sent To The Assessee By Rpad. There Was A Similar Non- Compliance On The Part Of The Assessee Even On The Earlier Occasions When The Appeal Was Fixed Or Hearing On 12.12.2017, 03.042018, 08.11.2018, 10.01.2019 & 04.02.2019. This Appeal Of The Revenue Is, Therefore, Being Disposed Of Ex-Parte Qua The Respondent Assessee After Hearing The Arguments Of The Learned Dr & Perusing The Relevant Material Available On Record.

68,443/- as found by the Ld. CIT(A) after verifying the relevant details and documents. As further found by the Ld. CIT(A), the said sum was inclusive of two amounts of Rs. 3,92,386/- and Rs. 6,80,989/- on which the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source. Regarding the balance amount