RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

68,963/- under section 115-0 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and\ninterest thereon Rs.4,06,965/- under section 115-P of the Act considering\nthe appellant as a Domestic Company instead of Co-operative Society,\nwhich is illegal, arbitrary and bad in law.\n5. THAT on the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-NFAC

DCIT,CIRCLE-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals being ITA Nos

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

viia) for the year under consideration is allowable as deduction separately and the ld. CIT(Appeals), in our opinion, is not justified to reduce the same in the working made by him while allowing the claim of the assessee for deduction on account of bad debts written off to the extent of Rs.14,39,88,729/-. We are, therefore

INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT BANK OF INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1416/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-2005) Industrial Investment Bank Vs. Dcit, Circle-6, Kolkata, Of India Limited, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, 19, Netaji Subhas Road, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabci 0324 D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya,Fca "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.K.Kureel, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 28/02/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 05/04/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: ` The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2004-2005, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Vi, Kolkata, In Appeal No.343/08-09/Cit(A)-Vi/Cir-6/Kol, Dated 29.04.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Ao U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 17.11.2006. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Is A Public Sector Undertaking Bank & Its Operations Are Solely In The Segment Of Non-Banking Financial Intermediation Services. The Assessee Being A Financial Institution, Its Activities Are Subject To Guidelines Issued By The Reserve Bank Of India For Banking Companies. During The Financial Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Company Written Off A Sum Of Rs.1,42,48,266/- On Account Of Debts As Irrecoverable. The Assessee Is An Organization To Which The Provisions Of Section 36(1)(Viia) Is Applicable.

Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act, where 10% provision is allowed, in any of two consecutive assessment years commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 2003 and ending before the 1st day of April, 2005. The Ld. AR for the assessee also submitted before us that merely because the assessee has not claimed in its return

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D,C,I.T., CIRCLE - 2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68,963/- under section 115-O of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and interest thereon Rs.4,06,965/- under section 115-P of the Act considering the appellant as a Domestic Company instead of Co-operative Society, which is illegal, arbitrary and bad in law. 5. THAT on the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-NFAC

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. JCIT (TDS), RANGE - 6, SILIGURI

68,963/- under section 115-O of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and\ninterest thereon Rs.4,06,965/- under section 115-P of the Act considering\nthe appellant as a Domestic Company instead of Co-operative Society,\nwhich is illegal, arbitrary and bad in law.\n5. THAT on the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-NFAC

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(1), JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal for A

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68,973/- u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194C of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.: 1886, 1887 & 1923/KOL/2024 AYs: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2014-15 Raiganj Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v) Ground no. 8 is related to disallowance of Security Charges Rs.10,01,650/- u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(2), JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal for A

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68,973/- u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194C of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.: 1886, 1887 & 1923/KOL/2024 AYs: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2014-15 Raiganj Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v) Ground no. 8 is related to disallowance of Security Charges Rs.10,01,650/- u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(2), JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal for A

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68,973/- u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194C of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.: 1886, 1887 & 1923/KOL/2024 AYs: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2014-15 Raiganj Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v) Ground no. 8 is related to disallowance of Security Charges Rs.10,01,650/- u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

36(1)(viia).The revenue has filed the present\nappeal against the order of CIT(A) on the issue of giving relief to the\nAssessee received on grant. The Revenue has taken the following\ngrounds:\n\"1. That on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT (A) erred in not appreciating that

D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S UCO BANK, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and that of Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

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

Section 36(1)(viia) needs to be restricted to actual provision made in the books. 2. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(Appeals) was grossly unjustified in law and on facts in upholding disallowance of Rs.2,36,68

UCO BANK,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and that of Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

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

Section 36(1)(viia) needs to be restricted to actual provision made in the books. 2. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(Appeals) was grossly unjustified in law and on facts in upholding disallowance of Rs.2,36,68

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

36(1)(viia) as referred to in Ground No.1 as above in disregard of the decision of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench in the case of Syndicate Bank (78 ITD 103) and solely relying on the CBDT’s Instruction No. 17 of 2008 dated 26.11.2008. 3. That, on facts as well as on law, the Learned

HARMUNY ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 161/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Harmuny Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle-9(1), Kolkata 32A/28, Suren Sarkar Road Vs Kolkata - 700010 [Pan : Aacch5841H] अपीलाथ"/ (Assessee ) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwary, A/R Revenue By : Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/07/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 31/01/2023 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1.) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Order U/S 250 Of The Act Dated 31.01.2023 Passed By Ld. Cit (A), Nfac Is Arbitrary, Unjustified & Bad In Law. 2.) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By Ao Amounting To Rs. 6,85,53,691/- Towards Provision For Bad & Doubtful Debts Under Provisions Of Income Tax Act, 1961 Without Considering The Fact That The Same Was Actually Written Off From The Accounts Of The Appellant In Previous Year. 3.) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 3,12,27,393/- U/S 41(1) Read With Section 28(Iv) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On The Presumption That Liability

68,553,691/- is allowable under the Act or not needs to be considered. The first ground on which the ld. Assessing Officer has made the addition is that the assessee has shown it as a provision for bad and doubtful debts. We, however, on perusal of the financial statements as well as the statement filed by the assessee find

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.623 & 748/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata………...……………..……….……….……….……Appellant Vs. West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation Limited......……...…..…..Respondent 23, A N Thakur Sarani, Circus Avenue, Kol - 700017.. [Pan: Aaacw3043Q] Appearances By: Shri B R Dutta, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 21, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 12, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 09.08.2024 Of The Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arise From Same Appellate Order, Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. 2. Ita No.623 & 748/Kol/2025 Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 139 & 159 Days Respectively & The Revenue Has Filed Separate Petitions For Condonation Of The Delays. After Going Over The Said Petitions, We Find Sufficient Reasons Behind Such Delays & Consequently, The Delays In Filing Both The Appeal Are Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeals On Merits.

36(1)(viia).The revenue has filed the present appeal against the order of CIT(A) on the issue of giving relief to the Assessee received on grant. The Revenue has taken the following grounds: “1. That on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not appreciating that the grant