JCIT (OSD), CC-XX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S G. S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG) PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2009-10

68,15,880/- after making certain additions / disallowances to the total income of the assessee. 3. First issue raised by Revenue in ground No. 1, 2 & 2.1 are inter-related and therefore being taken up together that Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by Assessing Officer for ₹10,58,25,030/- on account of interest received

SEEMA SUREKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

68 of the\nAct does not overtly result in any significant revenue gain since the rate of\ntax prevailing for this assessment year was 30% u/s 115BBE of the Act.\nThis rate was enhanced to 60% from AY 2017-18 only. While the issue of\ntaxation would at best be a secondary consideration in deciding the merit\nof the case

DCIT, CIR-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1293/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2007-08 Dcit, Cir-5, -Vs.- M/S Kesoram Industries Ltd. Kolkata [Pan : Aabck 2326 B] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Goulen Hangshing, Cit, Dr For The Respondent : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Ar Date Of Hearing : 24.05.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2017 Order

68,59,775.00 Power and Fuel 19,27,326.00 Stores Consumed 19,57,28,780.00 4 5 Kesoram Industries Ltd. A.Yr.07-08 Machinery repairs 6,08,33,177.92 Other repairs 31,15,161.95 Contractors, Transports & Others 1,93,05,618.53 Lime Stone Purchase 13,98,728.00 Misc. Other than Stores 52,96,505.71 Rates and taxes 27,989.00 Insurance

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

145A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Method of accounting – In certain cases – Assessment year 2001-02 – Whether in respect of excisable goods manufactured and lying in stock, excise duty liability would get crystallized on date of clearance of goods and not on date of manufacture and, therefore, till date of clearance of excisable goods assessee cannot be said

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

145A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Method of accounting – In certain cases – Assessment year 2001-02 – Whether in respect of excisable goods manufactured and lying in stock, excise duty liability would get crystallized on date of clearance of goods and not on date of manufacture and, therefore, till date of clearance of excisable goods assessee cannot be said

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

145A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Method of accounting – In certain cases – Assessment year 2001-02 – Whether in respect of excisable goods manufactured and lying in stock, excise duty liability would get crystallized on date of clearance of goods and not on date of manufacture and, therefore, till date of clearance of excisable goods assessee cannot be said

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

145A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Method of accounting – In certain cases – Assessment year 2001-02 – Whether in respect of excisable goods manufactured and lying in stock, excise duty liability would get crystallized on date of clearance of goods and not on date of manufacture and, therefore, till date of clearance of excisable goods assessee cannot be said

DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S D.K. BASAK JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2127/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. D. K. Basakjewellers Pvt. Ltd. P-7, Chowringhee Square,Aayakar 220B, Rashbehari Avenue, Kolkata – Bhavan, 8Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 700 019. 069. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcd 6781 F (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

68,862/- and was agreed to pay Rs. 3Crore as additional advance tax. But till today the assessee has only deposited Rs. 1 Crore.” 4. Further statement of Shri Dipak Kumar Basak, director of the company, was recorded onthe date of survey in relation to difference of physical stock with stock recorded in books. Therelevant extracts are reproduced below

BEEKAY STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 954/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Beekay Steel Industries Ltd. -Vs- Pr. Cit-1, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 3205 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 145A of the Act, on which fact there is no dispute. The tax auditor in the tax audit report had observed that a sum of Rs. 30,45,000/- was paid as excise duty on sales before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. In this regard

M/S. IMC LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

145A. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 145,- (a) the valuation of purchase and sale of goods and inventory for the purposes of determining the income chargeable under the head “profit and gains of business or profession” shall be- (i) in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee; and (ii) further adjusted

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. IMC LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

145A. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 145,- (a) the valuation of purchase and sale of goods and inventory for the purposes of determining the income chargeable under the head “profit and gains of business or profession” shall be- (i) in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee; and (ii) further adjusted

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. I M C LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

145A. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 145,- (a) the valuation of purchase and sale of goods and inventory for the purposes of determining the income chargeable under the head “profit and gains of business or profession” shall be- (i) in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee; and (ii) further adjusted

M/S JAINEX METALIKS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE ACIT, CIR-3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini) Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Jainex Metaliks Ltd......…..............….……...........…………..……………….…...……..…..…….......Appellant 11, Brabourne Road 3Rd Floor Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Aaacj 6568 R] Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-3, Kolkata...……......…….....….…............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 22Nd, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 26Th 2019 Order Per S.S. Godara, Jm :-

Section 68 addition of share application money amounting to Rs.4,50,000/- treated as unexplained cash credits; respectively in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The assessee’s former substantive ground challenges the lower authorities action of adding Rs.5,86,150/- on account of excise duty not included in closing

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. E.I.H. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA NO

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

145A of the Act and the verdict of the Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau vs CIT reported in 87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it was held that indirect taxes collected should form part of trading receipts and should be included in the total receipts of the assessee. Accordingly

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