Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 28 (2.21 seconds)
Documents citing Dcit, Cir-1(1), Kolkata, Kolkata vs M/S Landis + Gyr Ltd., Kolkata on 13 September, 2017

Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs Dcit, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata, Kolkata on 6 December, 2019

Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Cir-4(1), Kol. Page 5 of surplus funds in case of tea company has to be treated as business income since the main activity is of growing, manufacturing and selling of tea and not that of earning interest by making investments in short term fixed deposits. No contrary judicial precedent has been quoted at the Revenue's behest taking a different stand against the taxpayer.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 12 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Duncans Tea Ltd, Kolkata vs A.C.I.T.,Circle - 4(1), Kolkata, ... on 10 January, 2020

5. We have heard rival pleadings against and in support of the impugned disallowance. The assessee's case that its packed tea damages claim in question has ITA No.803/Kol/2018 Assessment Year 2011-12 Duncans Tea. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Cir-4(1) Kol. Page 5 been worked out to the tune of 0.01% of the total turnover only which is allowable as normal business expenditure. The Revenue on the other hand quotes lower authorities' findings that the impugned disallowance has been rightly made on account of assessee's failure in filing exact corresponding details. After giving our thoughtful consideration to rival pleadings, we observe that neither parties submission deserve to be accepted in entirety. The fact remains that assessee has not placed on record all the necessary details in either of the lower proceedings and the Revenue also fails to dispute that such a loss of packed tea cannot be altogether ruled out in regular business activity. We therefore conclude that a lump sum disallowance of ₹20,000/- only would meet the ends of justice with a rider that same shall not be treated as a precedent in any other assessment year. The assessee's latter substantive grievance is partly accepted.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Panihati Rubber Limited , Kolkata vs D.C.I.T.,Circle-7(2), Kolkata on 11 February, 2021

Order pronounced in open court on 11/02/2021 Sd/- Sd/- (लेखा सद'य) ( या)यक सद'य) (J.Sudhakar Reddy) (Sanjay Garg) Accountant Member Judicial Member *Dkp-Sr.PS *दनांकः- 11/02/2021 कोलकाता / Kolkata ITA No.589/Kol/2019 Assessment Year 2012-13 M/s Panihati Rubber. Ltd. Vs DCIT Cir-7(2), Kol. Page 5 आदे श क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

West Bengal Electronics Industry ... vs Dcit, Corporate Circle - 2(2), Kolkata, ... on 30 April, 2019

5. Next comes the assessee's latter substantive ground seeking to delete Sec. 14A r.w.s. 8D (2)(iii) administrative expenditure disallowance amounting to ₹4,11,284/- in respect of its exempt income amounting to ₹16,07,896/-. There is hardly any dispute that the impugned disallowance provision regarding the instant third head of administrative expenditure applies with effect from assessment year 2008-09 onwards. The assessee's only case during the course of hearing is that both the lower authorities have computed the impugned disallowance without following this tribunal's decision ITA No.1202/Kol/2018 A.Y 2012-13 WBEIDC. Ltd.. Vs DCIT, Cir-2(2) Kol.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

At&S India Private Limited, Karnataka vs D.C.I.T., Circle-11(1), Kolkata, ... on 10 October, 2018

As s e s s men t Yea r : 201 3- 1 4 basis. We note that the ld Counsel for the assessee submitted before us a brief chart which is mentioned in para 27 of this order to prove the benefit test. This chart explains the nature of services, main functions, and documentary evidences for receipt of services along with paper book reference. This chart also explains the relevant para of the Cost Contribution Agreement (CCA). The assessee received the purchase & order handling services and sales services and documented them properly. The assessee also submitted the certificate issued by PWC Austria (pb.no. 997 to 999), about the Costs allocated to AT&S India Pvt. Ltd. The copies of 78 chains of e-mail, job description sheets of 10 individual employees of the CCA team, evaluation reports of 6 global customers and flow chart of quotation processing services prove that assessee has received benefit from these services. The ld DR for the Revenue has not disputed that these services have not been received by the assessee, he disputed only the 'Benefit Test', that assessee did not get the benefit out of these services. We are of the view that assessee has proved that he had received the benefit from these services, by way of submitting a brief chart containing the services obtained, which is mentioned in para 27 of this order. Therefore, we note that the assessee has satisfied the 'benefit test', and for that we rely of the judgment of the coordinate bench Kolkata in the case of DCIT Vs. Landis + Gyr Ltd. [2017] 86 Taxmann.com, 109 (Kol. trib.), wherein it was held that the assessee had derived commercial benefits out of rendering of intra group services by AE and payment made thereon were in the nature of third party, which would willing to pay.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 28 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Acit, Cir - 2(2), Kolkata, Kolkata vs M/S. Net Guru Ltd., , Kolkata on 23 August, 2019

(iv). Thirdware Solutions Ltd We note that Coordinate Bench of Kolkata Tribunal in the matter of Sun Life India Service Centre (P.) Ltd v. DCIT reported in [2016] 71 taxmann.com 189 (Delhi - Trib.) for AY 2010-11, wherein it was noted that the assessee was rendering software development service to its AE. The Tribunal inter alia held that Thirdware Solutions Ltd could not be accepted as comparable because of the Pa g e | 2 4 M/s Net Guru. Ltd.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dcit, Cir-11(1), Kolkata, Kolkata vs M/S. Epcos India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata on 10 July, 2020

10. The ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that the impugned international transaction is at arm's length under the TNMM undertaken by the assessee at the en entity level. The ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the matter of Kaypee Electronics & Associates (P.) Ltd vs. DCIT reported in [2018] 94 taxmann.com 251 (Karnataka), wherein it is held that in the even event the royalty paid already forms part of the operating cost under the TNMM, there is no necessity of separately bench marking royalty. In the instant case, the operating cost of INR 1298689 Thousand computed by the assessee under the TNMM (kindly refer to paragraph no. 5.1.6 contained in the transfer pricing study report - page no. 197 of the paperbook) includes royalty paid by the assessee to EPCOS AG (INR 9371 Thousand) under the head 'Other expenses' (INR 326,516 Thousand). The computation of 'Other Expenses' is as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next