PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. DOZCO (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court found no substantial question of law arising from the ITAT's order. The ITAT had correctly affirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the assessment order was passed beyond the statutory limitation period prescribed by Section 153.
What were the facts?
The revenue appealed against an ITAT order that upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow the assessee's appeal. The CIT(A) had found the assessment order invalid due to non-adherence to Section 153 of the Income Tax Act regarding limitation.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment order was passed within the limitation period as per Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, and if the ITAT was justified in upholding the CIT(A)'s decision on this factual ground.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
OD-35 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE
ITAT/138/2024 IA NO: GA/2/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA VS DOZCO (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
BEFORE : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM -A N D- HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA DATE : 14th August, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. . …for appellant.
Mr. S. M. Surana, Adv. Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta, Adv. …for respondent.
The Court :- This appeal by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated August 22, 2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata in ITA/48/KOL/2021 for the assessment year 2012-2013. The revenue has raised the following substantial question of law for consideration: a. WHETHER on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee without appreciating the purport of Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 where default date of service has been reflected as April 03, 2015 and the same did not prove that the order was served to the assessee on that date as it was system generated default date ?
2 We have heard learned Advocates on either side. The revenue has filed the appeal before the learned tribunal challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]-7, Kolkata [CIT(A)] dated 14.9.2020 for the assessment year 2012-13. The CIT(A) by an order dated 14.9.2020 allowed the appeal filed by the assessee challenging the assessment order dated 23.4.2015. The CIT(A) after considering the entire facts in paragraph 4.1 of its order has recorded that the Assessing Officer has not adhered to the statutory provisions of section 153 of the Act in passing the assessment order under section 143[3]. In fact, the CIT(A) had given an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to submit a remand report on the queries which was sought for. However, the Assessing Officer failed to submit a report. Thus, after taking into considering the facts the CIT(A) found that only a computation sheet was served on the assessee on 7.4.2015 along with a part of the assessment order dated 29.3.2015. The assessee filed an affidavit stating that the computation sheet is only a tax computation sheet which is to be served along with the assessment order. On facts, the CIT(A) found that the assessment order has been passed well beyond the date of limitation and it is not a valid order in terms of section 153 of the Act. The correctness of this factual finding was re-examined by the tribunal and after considering the facts affirmed the said finding. The learned tribunal not stopping with that proceeded to consider the merits of the matter and recorded its reasons on facts as to why the CIT(A) was justified in allowing the assessee’s appeal. Thus, we find no question of law much less substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal.
3 Accordingly, the appeal fails and dismissed. Consequently, the application, GA/2/2024 stands dismissed.
. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE
(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) pkd/GH.
More judgments on Section 153
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2128/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4558/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3228/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Zabuben Mepabhai Bharvad, Ahmedabad vs The PCIT - 1, AhmedabadITA 1233/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 3453/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026