Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO

41 ITR 191Supreme Court of India1961#192 most cited

What is Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

The assessee's duty is limited to disclosing all primary, material facts necessary for assessment, including entries, documents, and other evidence. It is for the Assessing Officer to draw inferences of fact and law, and the assessee is not obligated to offer such inferences.

384

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO · Section 147 · Section 148 · assessee's duty · full and true disclosure · primary facts · material facts for assessment · drawing inferences · reassessment conditions

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 68Section 151Section 143(2)Section 132
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 147(a)true and full disclosurematerial facts necessary for assessmentfresh tangible materialfirst proviso to section 147kelvinatorfull and true disclosurebeyond four yearsmere change of opinionlive linksection 35dsection 148(2)

Judgments citing Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2444/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd 15. ITO 41 ITR 191 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court, held that-(i) it is the assessee's duty to disclose primary facts, including particular entries in account books, particular portions of documents and other evidence disclosed (6) once all primary facts are before the assessing authority, be requires no further assistance by way of disclosure, (in) it is for the asses…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2443/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd 15. ITO 41 ITR 191 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court, held that-(i) it is the assessee's duty to disclose primary facts, including particular entries in account books, particular portions of documents and other evidence disclosed (6) once all primary facts are before the assessing authority, be requires no further assistance by way of disclosure, (in) it is for the asses…

Ashok Sharma, Kota vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2 - Kota, Kota

ITA 359/JPR/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Nov 2024AY 2014-2015
For Appellant: Shri Priyank Kabra (C.A.) (V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

…ee are as below: 20 [A.] The Gujrat High Court in Kalpataru Sthapatya (P.) Ltd Vs ITO_[2013] 215 Taxman 479 (Guj) (paper book pg. no. 129-135) has observed at Para 6 and 6.1 of the order as under: “6. The apex court in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 191 has laid down as under : "The assessee has responsibility of disclosing all primary facts, but once he has disclosed all the primary facts, his duty ends and it is for the assessing officer to draw the proper conclusions from it. If the wrong conclusion is drawn, then it is no ground for reopening the assessment because the assessing authority pre…

Shankar Construction, Panchgachia vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Purnea

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 565/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 565/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Shankar Construction,………………..…….……Appellant Panchgachia, Panchgachia-852124, Bihar [Pan:Abofs0800R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………….……..……Respondent Ward-3(1), Purnea, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashok Kumar, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 22, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 18, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…ted extent, the actioin of the Income Tax Officer in starting proceedings in respect of income escaping assessment is open to challenge in a Court of law (see observations of this Court in the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. -vs.- Income Tax Officer [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) and Narayanappa -vs.- Commissioner of Income Tax [1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) while dealing with corresponding provisions of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922). 9………………… 10………………. 11. As staled earlier, the reasons for the formation of the belief must have a rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief. Rational connect…

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 54/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)Section 80I

…eliefs were refused without adequate reasons, we see that the action on the part of the respondent authority is impermissible in view of aforesaid set of circumstance. The observations made by the Apex Court in case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO (1961) 41 ITR 191 at page 195 head-note (v) are worth to be reproduced hereafter:- ITA Nos.1867/Ahd/2019 & 54/Ahd/2020 Assessment Years: 2011-12 Page 6 of 8 “That though the writ of prohibition or certiorari would not issue against an executive authority, the High Courts had power to issue in a fit case an order prohibiting an executive authority from acting with…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1867/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)Section 80I

…eliefs were refused without adequate reasons, we see that the action on the part of the respondent authority is impermissible in view of aforesaid set of circumstance. The observations made by the Apex Court in case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO (1961) 41 ITR 191 at page 195 head-note (v) are worth to be reproduced hereafter:- ITA Nos.1867/Ahd/2019 & 54/Ahd/2020 Assessment Years: 2011-12 Page 6 of 8 “That though the writ of prohibition or certiorari would not issue against an executive authority, the High Courts had power to issue in a fit case an order prohibiting an executive authority from acting with…

Aarav Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Cent. Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

ITA 13/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. D.R
Section 145Section 147Section 148

…d addition of Rs. 2,94,763/- in the instant case requires to be deleted on this count itself. The ld. A.R. relied upon the following decisions:- i) NDTV 271 taxman 1 (SC) I.T.A Nos. 10 to 13/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2011-12 to 2012-13 Page No. 10 ii) Calcutta Discount 41 ITR 191 (SC) iii) Bombay Stock Exchange 365 ITR 181 (Bom HC) iv) Parshuram Potteries 106 ITR 1 (SC) The ld. A.R. in respect of ground no. 1 related to reopening u/s. 147 relied upon the decision of NDTV 271 taxman 1 (SC), Calcutta Discount 41 ITR 191 (SC), Bombay Stock Exchange 365 ITR 181 Bom HC, Parshuram Potteries 106 ITR S (SC) as relates to merits of…

Vicky Rajesh Jhaveri, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Cent. Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

ITA 12/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. D.R
Section 145Section 147Section 148

…d addition of Rs. 2,94,763/- in the instant case requires to be deleted on this count itself. The ld. A.R. relied upon the following decisions:- i) NDTV 271 taxman 1 (SC) I.T.A Nos. 10 to 13/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2011-12 to 2012-13 Page No. 10 ii) Calcutta Discount 41 ITR 191 (SC) iii) Bombay Stock Exchange 365 ITR 181 (Bom HC) iv) Parshuram Potteries 106 ITR 1 (SC) The ld. A.R. in respect of ground no. 1 related to reopening u/s. 147 relied upon the decision of NDTV 271 taxman 1 (SC), Calcutta Discount 41 ITR 191 (SC), Bombay Stock Exchange 365 ITR 181 Bom HC, Parshuram Potteries 106 ITR S (SC) as relates to merits of…

Vicky Rajesh Jhaveri, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Cent. Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

ITA 11/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. D.R
Section 145Section 147Section 148

…d addition of Rs. 2,94,763/- in the instant case requires to be deleted on this count itself. The ld. A.R. relied upon the following decisions:- i) NDTV 271 taxman 1 (SC) I.T.A Nos. 10 to 13/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2011-12 to 2012-13 Page No. 10 ii) Calcutta Discount 41 ITR 191 (SC) iii) Bombay Stock Exchange 365 ITR 181 (Bom HC) iv) Parshuram Potteries 106 ITR 1 (SC) The ld. A.R. in respect of ground no. 1 related to reopening u/s. 147 relied upon the decision of NDTV 271 taxman 1 (SC), Calcutta Discount 41 ITR 191 (SC), Bombay Stock Exchange 365 ITR 181 Bom HC, Parshuram Potteries 106 ITR S (SC) as relates to merits of…

Sagar Rajesh Jhaveri, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Cent. Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

ITA 10/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. D.R
Section 145Section 147Section 148

…d addition of Rs. 2,94,763/- in the instant case requires to be deleted on this count itself. The ld. A.R. relied upon the following decisions:- i) NDTV 271 taxman 1 (SC) I.T.A Nos. 10 to 13/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2011-12 to 2012-13 Page No. 10 ii) Calcutta Discount 41 ITR 191 (SC) iii) Bombay Stock Exchange 365 ITR 181 (Bom HC) iv) Parshuram Potteries 106 ITR 1 (SC) The ld. A.R. in respect of ground no. 1 related to reopening u/s. 147 relied upon the decision of NDTV 271 taxman 1 (SC), Calcutta Discount 41 ITR 191 (SC), Bombay Stock Exchange 365 ITR 181 Bom HC, Parshuram Potteries 106 ITR S (SC) as relates to merits of…

M/S Madras Race Club, Chennai vs. DCIT, Cenral Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 688/CHNY/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Bleshri Manu Kumar Giriand Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.688/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2007-2008 M/S.Madras Race Club, The Deputy Commissioner Of Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Central Circle 1(2) Guindy, Chennai Chennai 600 032. Pan: Aaacm 7640R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Irs, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. V. Nandakumar, IRS, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…d on ‘borrowed satisfaction’ or ‘opinion of another authority’. Further, such reason to believe was to be based on ‘new tangible material’ and not on ‘material already available on record’. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) held that even if the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Officer from the facts disclosed by the assessee during the course of original assessment is erroneous, the Assessing Officer cannot reopen the assessment to change that erroneous conclusion once reached at. Further, in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 187 Taxman 312 (SC): 320 ITR…

Kokan Mercantile Co-Op Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 20(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1731/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…erial facts fully and hence, by virtue of first proviso to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, as there is no failure of the Appellant to disclose all the primary facts, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the CIT V/s. Calcutta Discount Company-41 ITR 191, the Notice issued by the Ld. Assessing Officer under Section 148 is bad in law, illegal and without assumption of jurisdiction and the same ought to be quashed. 6. On the facts and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer's reason for re- opening of the assessment is based on change of opinion, which is impermissible in law. 7. On the facts and in law,…

Kokan Mercantile Co-Op Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 20(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1730/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…erial facts fully and hence, by virtue of first proviso to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, as there is no failure of the Appellant to disclose all the primary facts, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the CIT V/s. Calcutta Discount Company-41 ITR 191, the Notice issued by the Ld. Assessing Officer under Section 148 is bad in law, illegal and without assumption of jurisdiction and the same ought to be quashed. 6. On the facts and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer's reason for re- opening of the assessment is based on change of opinion, which is impermissible in law. 7. On the facts and in law,…

M/S. Coolhut Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee isallowed

ITA 1450/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Sept 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: the time of hearing.”

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC”BENCH KOLKATA Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member ShriSanjay Awasthi,Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1450/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Coolhut Marketing Pvt. Ltd., 2, Lal Bazar Street, 1st Floor, Kolkata - 700001 [PAN: AAECC7664F] .......................…...……………....Appellant vs. Income Tax Officer-6(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700069.....…..........................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Manoj Kataruka, AR Department represented by : Prabir Gupta Choudhury, Addl. CIT Date of concluding the h…

Big Boss Foods Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan vs. ACIT, Cir. 1, Burdwan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 398/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'बी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य एवं श्री प्रदीप कुमार चौबे, न्याधयक सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 398/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Big Boss Foods Pvt. Ltd............................................................Appellant [PAN: AABCB 1001 E] Vs. ACIT, Cir.-1, Burdwan...........................................................Respondent Appearances: Assessee represented by: P.J. Bhide, AR. Department represented by: P.P.…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai, DCIT Circle, Aaykar Bhavan vs. Svc Co-Operative Bank Limited

ITA 691/MUM/2024[2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2024

Bench: Smt. Kavitha Rajgopal & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Ld. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…cer does not amount to a true and full disclosure. 32. Let us now discuss some of the judgments cited at the Bar. First and foremost is the decision of a Constitution Bench of this court in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. [Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO, (1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC).] That was a case under section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 which is in pari materia to section 147 of the Act. The Constitution Bench explained the purport of section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and highlighted two conditions which would have to be satisfied before issuing a notice to reopen an assessment beyond four year…

M/S Sadashiv Ventures, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 33/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 33/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Sadashiv Ventures, Vs. The Dcit, बनाम Circle-1, Sco 9, Sector 7, Chandigarh Madhya Marg, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abufs6758C अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate & Shri Ashok Goyal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2024

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 68

…gements, it is clear that once the assessment has been completed under section 263, the same cannot be reopened under section 147. 33-Chd-2024 – Shri Sadashiv Ventures, Chandigarh 9 Also, in the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. Income- tax Officer [1961] 41 ITR 191, Hon'ble Supreme Court has given the decision that, "But the question will be decided after taking into consideration the nature of the business of the company, and till that is done, the Income-tax Officer believes that the contention raised before and persisted in is not a mere contention but maintenance of a falsehood about the nature of the tr…

Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), Kolkata.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 637/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 & I.T.A. No. 1067/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,…Respondent Pcit, Kolkata-2, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

…ITA No. 637/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2013-2014) & Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 637/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [PAN:AAHCA9115E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 & I.T.A. No. 1067/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, K…

Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. P.C.I.T., Kolkata - 2, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1067/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 & I.T.A. No. 1067/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,…Respondent Pcit, Kolkata-2, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

…ITA No. 637/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2013-2014) & Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 637/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [PAN:AAHCA9115E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 & I.T.A. No. 1067/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, K…

Ecgc Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 352/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ich was chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary, there is nothing else in the reasons. 16 The Supreme Court in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) has held that there can be no doubt that the duty of disclosing all primary facts relevant to the decision of the question before the assessment authority lies on the assessee. To meet all possible contentions that when some account books or other evidence have been produced, there is no duty of the assessee to disclose further facts which on…