Ia No: Ga/1/2020 (Old No. Ga/736/2020); Ga/2/2020 (Old No. Ga/737/2020) Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – 2, Kolkata v. M/S. Dadra Eximp Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly M/S. Nagreeka Synthetics Pvt. Ltd

OD - 2 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/25/2020 IA NO: GA/1/2020 (OLD NO. GA/736/2020);GA/2/2020 (OLD NO. GA/737/2020)PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 2, KOLKATAVS.M/s. DADRA EXIMP PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY M/s. NAGREEKA SYNTHETICS PVT.LTD.) BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : AUGUST 03, 2022. Appearance :Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv….for appellant GA/1/2020 (OLD NO.GA/736/2020) The Court : We have heard Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, learned Standing Counselfor the appellant. Though notice has been served on the respondent, but noneappears for the respondent. We have heard Mr. Agnibesh Sengupta, learned Advocate appearing for therespondent/assessee. As per the note submitted by the Superintendent Appeal Section, HighCourt, Original Side the case papers are not traceable and unconditional apologyhas been tendered. The said apology is accepted and one set of photostat copy of the stay petition as well as the condone delay petition be obtained from thelearned standing Counsel from the appellant and be kept on record. It appears that there is a delay of 517 days in filing the appeal. We haveperused the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay application and we aresatisfied with the reasons given therein. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appealis condoned. The application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal isallowed. ITAT/25/2020 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 7[th] May, 2018 passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench I.T.A. No. 2242/Kol/2016 for theassessment year 2010-2011. The revenue has raised the following substantialquestion of law for consideration:- a)Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the LearnedIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Kolkata was justified inlaw in holding that once the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)has decided on merits in the appeal under Section 143(3) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 restricting the disallowance under Section 14Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961, the re-computation of disallowanceunder Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per said decisionwas required to be simply followed by the assessing officer during theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Kolkata was justified inlaw in holding that once the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)has decided on merits in the appeal under Section 143(3) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 restricting the disallowance under Section 14Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961, the re-computation of disallowanceunder Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per said decisionwas required to be simply followed by the assessing officer during the proceeding under Section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 asthe necessary corollary ? We have heard Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, learned standing Counsel for theappellant. It cannot be disputed by the revenue that substantial question of law hasbeen answered against the revenue in several cases. The Tribunal has also takeninto consideration the factual position and recorded the following finding :- proceeding under Section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 asthe necessary corollary ? We have heard Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, learned standing Counsel for theappellant. It cannot be disputed by the revenue that substantial question of law hasbeen answered against the revenue in several cases. The Tribunal has also takeninto consideration the factual position and recorded the following finding :- “In our opinion, when the disallowance under section 14A was originallymade by the A.O. in the assessment completed under section 143(3) and thsame was merely repeated in the assessment under section 147/143(3), theissue relating to the said disallowance was required to be decided on meritby the Ld. CIT (A) in the appeal filed by the assessee against the order undersection 143(3) and when the same was actually decided by him as such onmerit, the re-computation of disallowance under section 14A as per the saiddecision was required to be simply followed by the A.O. during theproceeding under section 147/143(3) as a necessary corollary. We,therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned order of the Ld. CIT (A) givingsuch a direction to the A.O. accordingly and even the learned DR has notbeen able to raise any material contention to dispute this position”. In the light of the above factual conclusion we find that there is noquestion of law, much less substantial question of law, arises for consideration inthis appeal. Pkd/GH Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed. Consequently, GA/2/2020 (Old No. GA/737/2020) stands closed. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)