Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (1.03 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Panem Coal Mines Ltd., , Kolkata vs Acit, Central Circle - 3(1), Kolkata , ... on 1 May, 2019

M/S. Eveready Industries India Ltd., ... vs Pr.Cit-4, Kolkata on 13 December, 2019

31. Applying the ratio laid down in the foregoing decision to the facts of the present case, we note that when the impugned order was passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT, clause (i) of section 92BA of the Act had already been omitted by the Finance Act, 2017 and in that view of the matter the Ld. Pr. CIT could not set aside the order for alleged non-compliance with 24 ITA No. 805/Kol/2019 Eveready Industries India Ltd, AY- 2014-15 provision of law which no longer existed in the statute as on the date of order. The Ld. Pr. CIT's direction requiring the AO to consider making a reference to the TPO in the set aside proceedings is also contrary to the view expressed in the foregoing decision of the coordinate bench(supra). For all the foregoing reasons therefore, we hold that the AO's order did not suffer from any error for the reason that he did not make reference to the TPO. Accordingly the Ld. Pr. CIT's order for the reason setout in clause 3(b) of the SCN and for the entirely new set of reasons contained in the impugned order, is set aside. Ground Nos. 5 to 7 are accordingly allowed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 57 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Kritika Wires Ltd., Kolkata vs Pr.C.I.T.-2, Kolkata on 19 February, 2020

31. Applying the ratio laid down in the foregoing decision to the facts of the present case. we note that when the impugned order was passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT. clause (i) of section 92BA of the Act had already been omitted by the Finance Act. 2017 and in that view of the matter the Ld. Pr. CIT could not set aside the order for alleged non-compliance with provision of law which no longer existed in the statute as on the date of order. The Ld. Pr. CIT's direction requiring the AD to consider making a reference to the TPD in the set aside proceedings is also contrary to the view expressed in the foregoing decision of the coordinate bench (supra). For all the foregoing reasons therefore, we hold that the AO's order did not suffer from any error for the reason that he did not make reference to the TPO. Accordingly the Ld. Pr. CIT's order for the reason set out in clause 3(b) of the SCN and for the entirely new set of reasons contained in the impugned order, is set aside. Ground Nos. 5 to 7 are accordingly allowed. "
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Linc Pen & Plastics Ltd., Kolkata vs Pr. Cit, Kolkata-4, Kolkata on 22 April, 2021

31. Applying the ratio laid down in the foregoing decision to the facts of the present case, we note that when the impugned order was passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT, clause (i) of section 92BA of the Act had already been omitted by the Finance Act, 2017 and in that view of the matter the Ld. Pr. CIT could not set aside the order for alleged non-compliance with provision of law which no longer existed in the statute as on the date of order. The Ld. Pr. CIT's direction requiring the AO to consider making a reference to the TPO in the set aside proceedings is also contrary to the view expressed in the foregoing decision of the coordinate bench(supra). For all the foregoing reasons therefore, we hold that the AO's order did not suffer from any error for the reason that he did not make reference to the TPO. Accordingly the Ld. Pr. CIT's order for the reason setout in clause 3(b) of the SCN and for the entirely new set of reasons contained in the impugned order, is set aside. Ground Nos. 5 to 7 are accordingly allowed."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. G.D. Marketing Private Limited, ... vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), ... on 30 April, 2021

6. After going through the above amendment provision and correlating it with the amendment to section 92BA, I find the said corresponding amendment in proviso to section 40A(2)(a) is of no help to the Revenue. The said amendment has been made with effect from 01.04.2017 and when the said amendment is read with the amended section 92BA, then it is found that the transactions referred to section 40A(2)(b) stood omitted from the definition of Specified Domestic Transaction vide the said amendment. Therefore, even applying the said amended proviso, the transaction referred to in section 40A(2)(b) do not find place in the amended provisions to section 92BA of the Act. Therefore, the said corresponding amendment brought in section 40A shall not have the effect of a saving clause as pleaded by the ld. DR. In view of this, respectfully following the decisions of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the M/s DVC Emta Coal Mines Ltd. (supra), the order of the Assessing Officer is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to re- adjudicate the issue on claim of expenditure incurred in respect of payments made to persons referred in clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 40A of the Act in normal course after making necessary enquiries of particular claim of expenditure in accordance with law.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Gauhati Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Origami Cellulo Private Limited, ... vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - ... on 15 September, 2021

31. Applying the ratio laid down in the foregoing decision to the facts of the present case, we note that when the impugned order was passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT, clause (i) of section 92BA of the Act had already been omitted by the Finance Act, 2017 and in that view of the matter the Ld. Pr. CIT could not set aside the order for alleged non-compliance with provision of law which no longer existed in the statute as on the date of order. The Ld. Pr. CIT's direction requiring the AO to consider making a reference to the TPO in the set aside proceedings is also contrary to the view expressed in the foregoing decision of the coordinate bench(supra). For all the foregoing reasons therefore, we hold that the AO's order did not suffer from any error for the reason that he did not make reference to the TPO. Accordingly the Ld. Pr. CIT's order for the reason set out in clause 3(b) of the SCN ITA No. 394/Bang/2020 Page 31 of 31 and for the entirely new set of reasons contained in the impugned order, is set aside. Ground Nos. 5 to 7 are accordingly allowed."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 45 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Bengal Emta Coal Mines Ltd., , ... vs Dcit, Central Circle - 3(1), , Kolkata on 23 September, 2022

3. The ld. Counsel, therefore, has submitted that since the clause (i) of section 92BA stood omitted vide Finance Act 2017 and that the effect of the said omission would be that the said clause never existed on statute, therefore, the transactions done by the assessee with their AEs would not fall within the definition and scope of specified transaction and, therefore, the provision of section 92CA would not be applicable in the case of the assessee. That in view of this, the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer and pursuant to that, the directions of the DRP were not sustainable and that the assessment of the assessee is required to be done under normal provisions. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, in this respect, has relied upon the decision in the own cases of the assessees for assessment year 2013-14 decided vide common order of the Tribunal dated 01.05.2019 with the lead case in the case of M/s DVC Emta Coal Mines Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No.2430/Kol/2017, wherein, the Tribunal after considering the above submission has concluded as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1