ITAT Kolkata Bench
22,199 judgments
SATYA NARAYAN DARGARH,KOLKATA vs I.T.O., WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)
SATBICHAR DISTRIBUTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANPUR vs ITO, WARD 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)
SALT LAKE SERVICE STATION,KOLKATA vs DCIT, 49(1),, KOLKATA
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)
THE SIKH CULTURAL CENTRE,KOLKATA vs CIT (EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA
us. We feel that in the interests of substantive justice, this matter deserves to be remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for affording one more chance to the assessee to file the necessary details before him. The assessee would be expected to be alert to the opportunities provided by the Ld. CIT(E). Thus, we set aside the impugned order and remand the same as discussed above.
M/S. GOPAL DHARA TEA CO. PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs ITO, WARD 4(4), , KOLKATA
SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)
WELFARE BUILDINGS & ESTATES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs DCIT, CPC, , BENGALURU
us and heard both the Ld. AR/DR. There appeals to be considerable merit in the averment that the order u/s 154 of the Act is not signed. For this purpose, the only page where there is any signature visible deserves to be extracted: Rectification order u/s 154 of the IT Act, 1961) Name WELLFARE BUILDINGS & ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED AY : 2021-22
PRAMOD LAKRA DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD, KOLKATA
ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |
TARAK NATH KAR,KOLKATA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI
us, the Ld. AR argued that the assessee is a salaried employee of M/s ONGC Ltd., from which he retired and got substantial amounts as retirement benefit (Rs.57,01,012/-). It has been stated that the assessee had duly sent all the details to his tax consultant who apparently failed to file the return of income. It has been further stated that all amounts were received from the employer and even the investments were made from such receipts only. Also, due to non-filing of return of income, so
DEESHA TRADE ENDEAVOURS PVT LTD,SILIGURI vs ITO WARD 1(3), SILIGURI
Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member), Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)
SUNSHINE ENTERPRISE,BANKURA vs ITO, WARD 3(1), , BANKURA
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)
SANKARPUR JAMIAH SALAFIAH BAHRUL-ULOOM,MURSHIDABAD vs CIT(EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA
SANKARPUR JAMIAH SALAFIAH BAHRUL-ULOOM,MURSHIDABAD vs CIT(EXEMPTIONS), , KOLKATA
SREEMA ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJARHAT, NEW TOWN vs ITO, WARD 8(2), , KOLKATA
the ITAT are on this very same issue. It has been further pointed out that even before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee had raised the issue that the penalty proceedings were already dropped by JAO and hence there could have been no parallel action by a different AO. However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not specifically adjudicate on this issue and proceeded ahead to confirm the impugned penalty.
SUVENDU CHATTERJEE,KOLKATA vs D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-48, KOLKATA
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)
LOKANAYAK JAYAPRAKASH MEMORIAL COMMITTEE,KOLKATA vs CIT (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA
him.
MACRO DEALERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs P.C.I.T.(CENTRAL) - 1, , KOLKATA
SH. GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SH. RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)
OCEAN CASSETTE COPIER PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA
Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member), Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)
MANJIRA BANERJEE,KOLKATA vs A.C.I.T CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(3), KOLKATA
Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Choubey (Judicial Member)
ITO, KOLKATA vs SUJATA KAYAN, KOLKATA
the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been allowed on legal grounds.
ITO, KOLKATA vs SUJATA KAYAN, KOLKATA
the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been allowed on legal grounds.
