ALOKE RAY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT(INTT.TAXATION), CIR.-1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Transfer Pricing), Kolkata dated 06.03.2020. The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (IT & TP)-Kolkata ('Ld. CIT") has erred in law as well as on facts while initiating proceedings u/s 263 and, further, in concluding that Long Term Capital Gain offered to tax by the assessee should have

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

transfer, Assessing Officer may either accept valuation of property on basis of report of approved valuer filed by assessee or he may refer question of valuation of capital asset to DVO in ac- cordance with section 55A. Further, in S Muthuraja vs CIT (2013) 37 Таx- mann.com 35a (Mad HC), Hon'ble Madras High Court has held that where

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

transfer, Assessing Officer may either accept valuation of property on basis of report of approved valuer filed by assessee or he may refer question of valuation of capital asset to DVO in ac- cordance with section 55A. Further, in S Muthuraja vs CIT (2013) 37 Таx- mann.com 35a (Mad HC), Hon'ble Madras High Court has held that where

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-23(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SUDIP ROY, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed partly

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2007-08

price of Rs.2,80,882 – However, while calculating long-term capital gain, assessee adopted market value of property at Rs.34,55,000 as on 1-4-1981 – Assessing Officer considered such estimation of fair market value at a higher side and referred matter to DVO who computed fair market value of property at Rs.3,77,250 and completed assessment accordingly

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

transfer. In the similar facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.R. Ltd. v. V.P.Gupta, CIT in Civil Appeal Nos. 1594 to 1594 of 1972 dated 03.05.1978, wherein the head note – Section 72 of the Income-tax Act,. 1961 [Corresponding to section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] – Losses – Carry forward

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

transfer. In the similar facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.R. Ltd. v. V.P.Gupta, CIT in Civil Appeal Nos. 1594 to 1594 of 1972 dated 03.05.1978, wherein the head note – Section 72 of the Income-tax Act,. 1961 [Corresponding to section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] – Losses – Carry forward

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

transfer. In the similar facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.R. Ltd. v. V.P.Gupta, CIT in Civil Appeal Nos. 1594 to 1594 of 1972 dated 03.05.1978, wherein the head note – Section 72 of the Income-tax Act,. 1961 [Corresponding to section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] – Losses – Carry forward

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

transfer. In the similar facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.R. Ltd. v. V.P.Gupta, CIT in Civil Appeal Nos. 1594 to 1594 of 1972 dated 03.05.1978, wherein the head note – Section 72 of the Income-tax Act,. 1961 [Corresponding to section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] – Losses – Carry forward

A.C.I.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S ESTIN TIE UP PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

price as on that date is to be considered for the purpose of section 50C of the Act. 5.3 The submission of the assessee was not found to be tenable on the facts mentioned in the assessment order and since the contention was not tenable, the first date of transfer was treated as transfer as a whole and the market

M/S ESTIN TIE UP PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

price as on that date is to be considered for the purpose of section 50C of the Act. 5.3 The submission of the assessee was not found to be tenable on the facts mentioned in the assessment order and since the contention was not tenable, the first date of transfer was treated as transfer as a whole and the market

SHRI AMITABHA CHAUDHURI,KOLKATA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, DURGAPUR (WEST BENTAL), DURGAPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.2041/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02) Shri Amitabha Chaudhuri Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur 2D-401, “Avishikta 1”, 369/1, Purbachal Kalitala Road, Kolkata – 700078. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acdpc1857E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 01/01/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020

55A(a) & 55(2)(b)(ii) – held as acceptable by Hon. ITAT, Kolkata. Table # 2 Comparison of commercial parameters of Eastern Tea Estates (P) Ltd. on the basis of Audited B/S of the Company for FY'81- '82, FY'97 -98 and FY'98 -'99 on record, including figures stated for "previous years" Financial Saleable Sale Proceeds Secured Secured Loan

M/S KARB ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA

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

price having location disadvantage compared to other flats in the building/project. According to the Ld. AR, the assessee, therefore, requested the A.O. that he may refer the case to the Valuation Officer (DVO) according to the provisions u/s 55A of the Act and pleaded before the A.O that invoking blindly the provisions u/s 43CA and making additions based

MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL,SILIGURI vs. ITO, WD-2(1), SILIGURI, SILIGURI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Late Mahendra Kr. Agarwal Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Siliguri (L/H Of Susmita Agarwal) R.C. Building , Sevoke Road Siliguri-734001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afipa 9472 M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

section 50C of the Act. Other aspects of the issue i.e. nature of capital asset, its location as well as its transfer in the relevant previous year are not question. We proceed in view of this admitted factual background to find that the CIT(A) has affirmed the AO’s action vide following discussion : “4. From the submission