ITAT Kolkata Bench
22,193 judgments
MANIKALA VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs ITO, WARD 4(1),, KOLKATA
the hearing of the appeal.” 3. The issues in Ground No. 4 by the assessee is against the order of CIT(A) upholding the order of Assessing Officer, wherein the addition of Rs.33,35,000/-was made on account of unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act.
CHAKTENTUL SKUS LTD.,,DURGAPUR vs ITO, WARD 1(1),, DURGAPUR
28-02-2024 and in the process there is delay of 403 days in filing the instant appeal. The main reason is the appellant was suffering from prolonged illness and was under medical supervision. The appellant is attaching a copy of medical certificate issued by the doctor in this respect.
SUJOY KRISHNA JANA,KOLKATA vs DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE 27(1),, HALDIA
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)
SUJOY KRISHNA JANA,KOLKATA vs DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE 27(1),, HALDIA
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)
ANSAR RAHAMAN,KOLKATA vs ITO, WARD 49(1),, KOLKATA
SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)
JKC REALTY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs I.T.O., WARD - 9(1),, KOLKATA
the Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, Id counsel for the assessee submitted that the reopening of assessment is invalid and nullity in the eyes of law. The case of the assessee has been reopened for verification purpose only. Ld AR drew attention to the Bench to page 1 of the assessment order, wherein the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening of assessment are extracted. In the reasons extracted in assessment order at para-3, the Assessing Officer stated that “Thus it can be inferred
ISHVATHAM,KOLKATA vs I.T.O., WARD - 28(1),, KOLKATA.
SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)
ANUPAM SAHA,NORTH TWENTY FOUR PGS. vs ITO, WARD 50(2), KOLKATA
appeal order was never served upon him. It is stated that the user ID and password to get access of the e-filing portal was with the Authorised representative and said A.R. did not inform the assessee about the passing of the appellate order. It was also submitted that during that period, due to his serious illness, he was under treatment in Vellore and could not check up the tax matter with the A.R. It was in this backdrop that the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated period. It
M/S VIBHUTI MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs ITO, WARD-11(1), KOLKATA
the Assessing Officer by stating that the assessee received Rs.10,00,000/- from M/s Gajgamini Commodities on account of sale of shares. However, the Assessing Officer without doing any verification on the evidences furnished by the assessee which comprises of ledger account, bank statement, ITR, Balance Sheet etc. of Gajgamini Commodities Pvt. Ltd. The ld AO came to the conclusion that the assessee has not prove the genuineness of the transaction and consequently added amount to the income
RAHEE STEEL TECH PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA
the Assessing Officer on 10.1.2024, therefore, the action of AO (CPC) is not correct and cannot be sustained and so also the order of the Ld CIT(A). The above view finds support from the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Royal Led Equipment (P) Ltd vs CCIT (2025) 174 taxmann.com 61 (Gujarat), wherein, the Hon'ble High Court has held as under: 8. DISCUSSION & FINDINGS:- 8.1 In the decision of this Court in the case of V.M.Procon Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), this Court held as under
PHILIPS INTERNATIONAL B.V,KOLKATA vs ACIT(I.T) , CIR-2(1), KOLKATA., KOLKATA
SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)
BEEGEEY REALTORS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs PR. CIT (CENTRAL) - 2, , KOLKATA
ARUN ENGINEERING UDYOG PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs PR. CIT (CENTRAL) - 2, , KOLKATA
Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)
DECORUM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs PR. CIT (CENTRAL) - 2, , KOLKATA
TERAI TEA COMPANY LTD., ,KOLKATA vs ACIT, CIRCLE 4(1), , KOLKATA
DCIT,CC-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs SPML INFRA LTD, NEW DELHI
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)
SUGGEST VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs ITO -5(1), KOLKATA
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)
