M/S BIRGIRI C. S. SHOP,PURULIA vs. ITO, WD-3(2), PURULIA, PURULIA

In the result, the appeal of assesse is partly allowed

section (1) shall exercise the same unless or until he has received a license in that behalf from the Collector or the Excise Commissioner. Hence it could be safely concluded that M/s Asansol Bottling & Packaging Co. Pvt Ltd (Bottling Plant) is a warehouse within the meaning of Rule 2(vii) of the Excise Rules 2005 and said warehouse

ASHOK KUMAR MONDAL,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-2(2), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 40A(3) were not applicable. (3) For that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.62,68

M/S SARBARI SUPLIMENTARY C.S.SHOP,PURULIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -WARD 3(4), KOLKATA, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 40A(3) were not applicable. (3) For that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.62,68

M/S MRINALINI BIRI MANUFACTURING CO.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.85/Kol/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

3. Ground no. 1 raised by the assessee relates to disallowance of Rs. 4,68,092/- u/s 36(1)(v) on account of unapproved Gratuity Expenses. 4. Brief facts qua the issue are that on perusal of records furnished by the assessee, it was noticed by the assessing officer that the assessee made a contribution amounting to Rs.4,68

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de- novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de- novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de- novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee

BARIK BISWAS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de- novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de- novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee

BARIK BISWAS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de- novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de- novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de- novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee

M/S AB (WINES) STORES,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOLKATA-14, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.901/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ab (Wines) Stores -Vs.- Pr. C.I.T., Kolkata-14 Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aajfa 6312 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri R.S.Biswas, Cit Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

section 40A(3) of the Act. The ld CIT also observed that during the course of assessment proceedings, the ld AO issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to the following parties for purchases made from them:- Sl.No Name of the purchase party 1. M/s. B Deboo & Co.Pvt. Ltd. 2. M/s BBM Enterprise 3. M/s Mohan Brother (Drinks

NARAYAN CHANDRA JANA,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ITO, WARD - 27(3), HALDIA, HALDIA

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

68 or u/s. 69 of the Act. Considering these facts and circumstances and in the light of aforesaid decisions, we are inclined to set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition. Therefore, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 6. The issue raised in ground no. 2 is against

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Section\n40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, we feel that the same needs verification\nat the end of the Id. AO and accordingly, we restore the issue back to\nthe file of the Id. AO with a direction to frame the assessment de-\nnovo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the\nassessee. The appeal of the assessee

M/S KARU KANCHAN,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1291/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Karu Kanchan -Vs- Dcit, Circle-44, Kolkata [Pan: Aaefk 0644 G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 29.12.2010 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Ground Nos. 1 & 4 of the Revised Grounds of Appeal filed by the assessee is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. 2 M/s Karu Kanchan A.Yr. 2008-09 3. The Ground

MA PARAMESHWARI AGRO PVT. LTD.,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIR-2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2010-11 Ma Parameswari Agro V/S. Acit, Circle-2, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Vill Bhawan, Kachari Road, Chotoposhla, P.O. Corut Compound, Dist. Baroposhla, P.S. Burdwan-713101 Mangalkote, Dist. Burdwan, Pin-713125 [Pan No.Aadcm5950F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shir Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Robn Choudhury, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-10-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 31-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Burdwan’S Order Dated 29.03.2016 In Case No.115/Cit(A)/Asl/Acit/Cir-2/Bwn/2013-14 In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. We Come To Assessee’S Former Substantive Ground Challenging Correctness Of Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Disallowing Its Cash Payment Of ₹74,59,954/- U/S40A(3) Of The Act. The Cit(A)’S Findings Under Challenge After Considering The Assessing Officer’S Observations Both In Assessment As Well As Remand Report & Assessee’S Contentions Are Reproduced As Follows:-

section 40A(3) in respect of the said payments in cash. Hi action is confirmed. The ground is accordingly dismissed.” 3. We have given our thoughtful considerations to rival contentions against and in support of the impugned disallowances / additions. Some key facts emerge from the instant cases file. There is no dispute that this assessee is a company engaged

ITO, WD-29(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SPECIAL LEATHER INDUSTRIES, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal (ITA No

Bench: : Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

section 40A(3) of the Act and the addition made by the AO is not at all maintainable. The CIT-A considering the evidences, ledger copies and submissions of the assessee has rightly directed the AO to give the deduction. He relied on the order of the CIT-A and prayed to dismiss the ground no. 1 raised