M/S. MATARANI VINTRADE PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 15(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (Kz) & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13

8. Details of Fixed Assets and depreciation 9. Computation of total income. 10. Thus, the aforesaid documents were received by the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings and thereafter he issued notices u/s 133(6) of the Act to all the thirty eight (38) share applicant companies and after perusal of the documents furnished by them (PB-II pages

STAR PAPER MILLS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P. M .Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

144C of the Act dated 30.11.2019. Aggrieved by the said draft order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. DRP which dismissed by their order dated 27.02.2020. Being aggrieved by the same, the assessee is now in appeal before us. 8. In the course of hearing, the Ld. AR Shri Akkal Dudhewala FCA, appearing on behalf of the assessee

EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

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

68,848/- after making the following additions:- (i) T.P. Adjustment Rs.1,96,77,739/- (ii) Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) Rs. 3,00,000/- (iii) Rs. 1,61,124/- Disallowance u/s. 40A(9) The record of the assessment completed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read with section 144C(3) of the Act was examined

D.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Years: 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Income-Tax, Central G.K. Tower Vs. Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, Camac Street Kolkata -700017 (Pan: Aaace4975B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

144C(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by ACIT, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, dated 28/02/2020. 2. Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT, appeared for the revenue and Sri Ravi Tulsiyan, Advocate, A/R, appeared for the assessee. 3. Revenue has taken as many as ten grounds of appeal. From the perusal of grounds

ACIT, CEN, CIR-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Vs. Of Income-Tax, Central (Pan: Aaace4975B) Circle-4(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 In Ita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Electrosteel Casting Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd. Income-Tax, Central Circle- 4(4), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Present For: Department By - Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Shri Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Assessee By - Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Appeals By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-22 Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 46/Cit(A)-22/2014-15/17-18/Kol & 133/Cit(A)-22/2015-16/18-19/Kol Dated 31.07.2019 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By Dcit, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, Dated 29.01.2018 & Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata Dated 29.12.2018 Respectively. C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Ays 2014-15 & 2015-16 2. Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Appeared For The Revenue & Sri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Appeared For The Assessee.

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by DCIT, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, dated 29.01.2018 and ACIT, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata dated 29.12.2018 respectively. C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 2. Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal and Tushar Dhawal Singh, CIT appeared for the revenue

ACIT, CEN.CIR.-4(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S ELECTRSTEEL CASTINGS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Vs. Of Income-Tax, Central (Pan: Aaace4975B) Circle-4(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 In Ita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Electrosteel Casting Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd. Income-Tax, Central Circle- 4(4), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Present For: Department By - Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Shri Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Assessee By - Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Appeals By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-22 Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 46/Cit(A)-22/2014-15/17-18/Kol & 133/Cit(A)-22/2015-16/18-19/Kol Dated 31.07.2019 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By Dcit, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, Dated 29.01.2018 & Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata Dated 29.12.2018 Respectively. C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Ays 2014-15 & 2015-16 2. Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Appeared For The Revenue & Sri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Appeared For The Assessee.

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by DCIT, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, dated 29.01.2018 and ACIT, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata dated 29.12.2018 respectively. C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 2. Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal and Tushar Dhawal Singh, CIT appeared for the revenue

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It transpires during the course of hearing that almost all the issues raised in the instant cross-appeals filed at the both taxpayer’s and Revenue’s behest are identical and inter-connected. The assessee’s sole grievance in both

M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It transpires during the course of hearing that almost all the issues raised in the instant cross-appeals filed at the both taxpayer’s and Revenue’s behest are identical and inter-connected. The assessee’s sole grievance in both

M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It transpires during the course of hearing that almost all the issues raised in the instant cross-appeals filed at the both taxpayer’s and Revenue’s behest are identical and inter-connected. The assessee’s sole grievance in both

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It transpires during the course of hearing that almost all the issues raised in the instant cross-appeals filed at the both taxpayer’s and Revenue’s behest are identical and inter-connected. The assessee’s sole grievance in both

M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

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

68,889/-. He accordingly worked out the total Transfer Pricing Adjustment to be made in the assessee’s case at Rs.8,95,57,833/-. In the Draft Assessment Order dated 26.12.2016 addition to that extent was made by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee. The Assessing Officer also made further

BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES(CURRENTLY KNOWN AS BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CENTAL CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ground no. 11 & 12 are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Bothra Shipping Services ......…..…….……………………..…………………………………..……….……..Appellant (Currently Known As Bothra Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd.) Room No. 10 2Nd Floor “Sagar Estate 2 Clive Ghat Street Kolkata – 700 107 [Pan : Aadfb 8479 P] Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata.…….......….......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Naresh Jain & Mrs. Arati Debnath, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31St , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 144C R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The ‘Act’). As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 2. Brief Facts Of This Case Are Brought Out By The Ld. Drp At Page 1 Of His Order Which Is Extracted For Ready Reference:- Bothra India Is Engaged In The Business Of Handling Bulk Cargoes. Its Activities Include Vessel Handling, Stevedoring & Cargo Handling, Clearing & Forwarding & Other Port Related Activities. Jaldhi Overseas Pte Ltd ('Jaldhi Overseas') Engages Bothra India For Vessel Handling At The Port, To Provide Various Vessel Related Services Until The Vessel

Section 144C(8) r.w.s. 144C(5) of the Act. Reliance was placed on the following case-law:-  IBM India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, Large Taxpayers Unit [2014] 46 taxmann.com 129 (Bangalore - Trib.) It was argued that the ld. DRP having come to a conclusion that the functional profile is not the same, it should have

SAAB TECHNOLOGIES B.V.(FORMERLY KNOWN S ,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 153/KOL/2022 is allowed

Bench: Sri Anikesh Banerjee & Sri Girish Agrawal

sections 144C (3) to 144C (13) and interest as applicable under the provisions of the Act.” 6. Ld. A/R in reply placed as below: - Based on judicial pronouncements from various Indian Courts, following are the key principles that are relevant for determination of Installation PE: Time period of 6 months must be tested for each independent site separately

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED (SUCCESSOR OF TATA COFFEE LTD.),KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

144C(13) of the Act. 6.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has grossly erred in not granting claim of deduction u/s 80M of the Income tax Act, without assigning any reason thereof, while computing total income under the Act. 6.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances

DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

144C(15)(b) of the Act and accordingly the ld DRP cannot assume jurisdiction and directed the ld AO to proceed as per law. (xi) The ld AR argued that the entire addition of Rs. 2,43,53,752/- made in the reassessment based on ld TPO’s order , which was passed vide illegal reference, deserves to be deleted

M/S LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

144C(15)(b) of the Act and accordingly the ld DRP cannot assume jurisdiction and directed the ld AO to proceed as per law. (xi) The ld AR argued that the entire addition of Rs. 2,43,53,752/- made in the reassessment based on ld TPO’s order , which was passed vide illegal reference, deserves to be deleted

M/S LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

144C(15)(b) of the Act and accordingly the ld DRP cannot assume jurisdiction and directed the ld AO to proceed as per law. (xi) The ld AR argued that the entire addition of Rs. 2,43,53,752/- made in the reassessment based on ld TPO’s order , which was passed vide illegal reference, deserves to be deleted

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-8(1)KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Eih Ltd V/S. Dcit, Circle-8(1), 4, Mangoe Lane, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Kolkata-700 001 Chowringhee Square, [Pan No.Aaace 6898 B] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Ravi Sharma, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 27-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 16-05-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, (Drp For Short) Dated 17.10.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata U/S 144C(13)/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 29.11.2016 For Assessment Year 2012-13 & Grounds Raised By Assessee Read As Under:- “1.0 Determination Of Arm'S Length Price For Corporate Guarantee Fees 1.1 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Tpo") & Accordingly Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld. Ao") Erred In Treating The Corporate Guarantee Extended By The Appellant To Its Associated Enterprise (Ae) As International Transaction & Dispute Resolution Panel (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Panel") Erred In Confirming The Same As An International Transaction Without Appreciating The Fact That It Does Not Fall Within The Ambit Of "International Transaction" U/S 92B Of The Act. 1.2 The Ld.Ao/Tpo & The Ld. Panel Failed To Appreciate The Fact That Corporate Guarantee Has Been Advanced By The Appellant As A Matter Of Commercial Prudence To Protect The Business Interest Of The Group By Fulfilling

144C(13)/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 29.11.2016 for assessment year 2012-13 and grounds raised by assessee read as under:- “1.0 Determination of arm's length price for Corporate Guarantee fees 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Learned

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: the due date of filing of return under Section 139(1) of the Act.

144C(13), r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), after the Ld. Dispute Mecleod Russel India Ltd. Resolution Panel (hereafter “the Ld. DRP”) orders dated 24.06.2022 in both the cases. The assessee is aggrieved with the impugned orders and has raised the following grounds of appeal as under: “1. The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) erred