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

920 sq ft. purchased on ITA Nos.: 32 & 141/KOL/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Estin Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. 17.05.2006 which was transferred under a development agreement dated 01.06.2007 wherein a sum of ₹1,00,000/- per annum was determined towards commercial exploitation of the said developer and which was further amended from time to time providing for annual payout

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

920 sq ft. purchased on ITA Nos.: 32 & 141/KOL/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Estin Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. 17.05.2006 which was transferred under a development agreement dated 01.06.2007 wherein a sum of ₹1,00,000/- per annum was determined towards commercial exploitation of the said developer and which was further amended from time to time providing for annual payout

EXIMCORP INDIA (P) LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

transferred to the buyer. The seller gets a right to get the price of the goods and the buyer has a corresponding obligation to pay it, both as per the contract of sale and under the law. Therefore, debt is incurred by the buyer of the purchase-price which he is obliged to pay. The debt arises from the unwillingness

EXIMCORP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

transferred to the buyer. The seller gets a right to get the price of the goods and the buyer has a corresponding obligation to pay it, both as per the contract of sale and under the law. Therefore, debt is incurred by the buyer of the purchase-price which he is obliged to pay. The debt arises from the unwillingness

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRAPHITE INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am I.T.A Nos.472 & 474 & C.O Nos.64 & 66/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Graphite India Ltd. 31, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata- 700016. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacc0457C (Appellant) .. (Respondent/Cross-Objector)

920/- and Rs. 1,81,50,266/- respectively. The assessee availed of additional depreciation @ 20% on the original cost of the machinery at Rs. 5,95,494/- and Rs. 48,26,123/- respectively in AY 2006-07. In AY 2007-08 also the assessee claimed additional depreciation at 20% of the original cost

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRAPHITE INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am I.T.A Nos.472 & 474 & C.O Nos.64 & 66/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Graphite India Ltd. 31, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata- 700016. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacc0457C (Appellant) .. (Respondent/Cross-Objector)

920/- and Rs. 1,81,50,266/- respectively. The assessee availed of additional depreciation @ 20% on the original cost of the machinery at Rs. 5,95,494/- and Rs. 48,26,123/- respectively in AY 2006-07. In AY 2007-08 also the assessee claimed additional depreciation at 20% of the original cost

I.T.O WD - 7(2),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S WINSOME BREWERIES LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

price is not to transfer of a chattel qua chattel. [chattel- the term in English law includes all kinds of property except the free hold and things which are parcel of it - personal property comprising goods] (d) Contracts for rendering professional service by lawyers, physicians surgeons, engineers, accountants, architects, consultants, etc. can also not be regard as "contract for carrying

M/S. CALCUTTA CRICKET & FOOTBALL CLUB,KOLKATA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, WARD 1(1). KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

price for food or drinks but reimbursement of expenses met from the fund of the club, which had been contributed by the members themselves earlier and that there was no sale of the food or drinks and no consideration was involved. (j) Our assessment for the assessment year 2005-06 was made under sections

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6,, KOLKATA vs. LOKNATH SARAF SECURITIES LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, to sum up ITA No

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

920/- suffered on account of mark to mark/differences/jobbing and after adjusting the same against the income from self-difference/jobbing premium on F&O on account of brokerage, dividend and interest on Fixed Deposit declared under the same head, a net loss of Rs.1,88,47,120/- was declared by the assessee. According to the Assessing Officer, various transactions entered

M/S. FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

920/- for the year under consideration in the assessment completed under section 143(3)/144 vide an order dated 22.03.2013. 5. The records of the assessment made under section 143(3)/144 in the case of the assessee thereafter came to be examined by the ld. Pr. CIT and on such examination, he found that the assessee during the year

ACIT, CIR.-26(1), KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. M/S FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A.T. Varkey

920/- for the year under consideration in the assessment completed under section 143(3)/144 vide an order dated 22.03.2013 resulting into trading addition of Rs.109 crore. 5. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3)/144 of the Act, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) challenging the trading addition

ASG LEATHER PVT. LTD., ,SOUTH 24 PARGANAS vs. ITO, WARD - 15(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

transfer under clause (via) or clause (vic) of clause (vicb) or clause (vid) or clause (vii) of section 47". 3.5. The appellant has whimsically submitted second valuation report which contradicts the first valuation report submitted by him to the AO. This second valuation report constitutes additional evidence under Rule 46A of the I.T.A. No 2562/KOL/2017 Assessment year: 2013-2014 Page

HITT HOLLAND INSTITUTE OF TRAFFIC TECHNOLOGY B. V. vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 574/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Hitt Holland Institute Of Traffic -Vs.- D.D.I.T. (Intl.T)-1, Technology B.V., Kolkata Kolkata. [Pan : Aabch 5694 R] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.K.Agarwal, Ar For The Respondent : Shri.G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

920 30,090 1,794,267 Supply of Hardware Onshore Supply 85,500 59,592 25,908 1,544,894 of Software Onshore Supply 154,655 69,706 84,949 5,065,524 of Services Total 274,165 133,218 140,947 8,404,685 GOK Project Offshore 907,813 907,813 0 0 Supply of Hardware Offshore

ITO WARD-10(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AUM CAPITAL MARKET PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy& Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 302/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(4), Kolkata..………....................................….….……………….…......Appellant M/S. Aum Capital Market Pvt. Ltd.....................…..…….……………………………………………..……Respondent 5, Lower Rowdon Street Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan: Aaaco 7624 B] Appearances By: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit, Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 7Th,2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 28Th,2018 Order Per S.S. Godara, Jm :- This Revenue’S Appeal For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 4, Kolkata’S Order Dated 18/11/2016 Passed In Case No. Ita No.1125/Cit(A)-4/Range-10/Kol/14015 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act’).

920/- as expenditure apportioned towards speculation business: “The appellant in this regard would firstly like to submit that section 43(5) of the Income tax Act. 1961 deals with speculative transactions. Section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 reads as under: [Definitions of certain terms relevant to income from profits and gains of business or profession

SRI HARI SADHAN KONER L/H SMT. BONDANA PROVA KONAR,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD - 1(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

price of Rs. 20,000/-. The assessee computed long term capital gain at nil whereas the AO computed assessee’s share being 1/4th of the long term capital gain of Rs. 5,04,451/- without any basis by taking fair market value as on 1.4.1981 without referring the valuation issue to the DVO and thus calculation as made

RSP CAPITAL MARKETS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 53/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Rsp Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 6142 G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

920/-. The ld AO observed that the 2 RSP Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2006-07 assessee was requested to furnish different details by issue of letter dated 12.9.2008 and also as per the order sheet entires, which were duly complied with by the assessee. The ld AO observed that the assessee had earned dividend income

SPML INFRA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT-1 , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

price of the land is Rs.1,20,00,000/- and building is Rs.35,00,000/-. In the subsequent years the assessee invested in the building by doing construction work. The opening Written-Down Value (in short the “WDV”) of land and building as on 01.04.2016 is Rs.11,88,80,047/-. In this building, opening WDV of furniture is Rs.23