CIT v. Kaushalya

216 ITR 660High Court1995#131 most cited

What is CIT v. Kaushalya authority for?

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is not invalidated by the Assessing Officer's failure to strike off irrelevant portions in the show cause notice, provided the assessee understood the exact charge and suffered no prejudice, indicating an application of mind by the AO.

511

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,416 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kaushalya · 216 ITR 660 · Section 271(1)(c) penalty · penalty notice validity · non-striking off irrelevant portion · application of mind · prejudice to assessee · concealment of income · inaccurate particulars · Section 274

Sections most often in play

Section 274Section 271(1)(c)Section 139(1)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271AAB

Issues it is cited on

section 274furnishing inaccurate particularsfurnishing inaccurate particulars of incomepenalty u/s 271(1)(c)concealment of incomenon-application of mindlevy of penaltysection 271(1)section 271section 271(1)(c)section 27opportunity of being heard

Judgments citing CIT v. Kaushalya

Subhash Kumar Agarwal, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 46(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 2658/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ving Equipment Service Corporation Vs. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai, (2017) 84 taxmann.com 51 (iii) Mahesh M.Gandhi Vs. ACIT Vs. ACIT ITA NO.2976/Mum/2016 dated 27.2.2017. Reliance was placed on two decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court viz., (i) CIT Vs. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660(Bom) and (ii) MlS.Maharaj Garage & Co. Vs. CIT dated 22.8.2017. This decision was referred to in the written note given by the learned DR. This is an unreported decision and a copy of ITA No.2658-59/Kol/2018 Assessment Year 2014-15 Subhash Kr. Agarwal Vs ITO Wd-46(1), Kol. Page 4 the same was not furnished. However a gist of the ratio laid down i…

The Burdwan Central Co-Operative Bank Limited, Burdwan vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Burdwan

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2407/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 The Burdwan Central Co-op. Bank, AY 2010-11 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 2407/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Burdwan Central Co-op. Bank Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income- Limited (PAN: AABAT3547P) tax, Circle-2, Burdwan. Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 30.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 20.02.2019 For the Appellant Shri P. K. Ghosh, FCA For the Respondent Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT, Sr.…

M/S. Ray & Ray, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 22, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 381/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 M/s. Ray & Ray, AY- 2012-13 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “D” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")"ी पी. एम.जगताप, उपा"य" एवं "ी ए.ट". वक","या"यक सद"य) [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 381/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Ray & Ray Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, (PAN: AADFR8764R) Circle-22, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 06.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement 15.02.2019 For the Appellant Shri Piyush Dey, FCA For the Respondent Shri Shankar Halder, JCIT, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This is an appea…

Sri Radhashyam Mondal, 24 Parganas (South) vs. ITO, Ward - 22(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 225/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 Radhashyam Mondal, AY 2013-14 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 225/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Radhashyam Mondal Vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd-22(2), Kolkata (PAN: AJZPM3432G) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 30.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 08.02.2019 For the Appellant Miss Sweta Sharma, AR & Miss Sukanya Dutta, AR For the Respondent Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri A.T.Var…

Satya Narayan Sharma, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 44(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 162/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 Satya Narayan Sharma, AY- 2008-09 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “D” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")"ी पी. एम.जगताप, उपा"य" एवं "ी ए.ट". वक","या"यक सद"य) [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 162/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Satya Narayan Sharma Vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd. 44(4), Kolkata (PAN: AKLPS3545D) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 04.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement 08.02.2019 For the Appellant Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate For the Respondent Shri Shankar Halder, JCIT, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM Thi…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Rajgaria Timbers Privtate Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1470/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 ITA Nos. 1469-1470/Kol/2017 M/s. Rajgaria Timbers Pvt. Ltd, AYs. 2011-12-2012-13 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 1469 & 1470/Kol/2017 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Rajgaria Timbers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (PAN: AABCR8486M) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 31.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 08.02.2019 For the Appellant Shri A. K. Sing, CIT, D…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Rajgaria Timbers Privtate Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1469/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 ITA Nos. 1469-1470/Kol/2017 M/s. Rajgaria Timbers Pvt. Ltd, AYs. 2011-12-2012-13 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 1469 & 1470/Kol/2017 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Rajgaria Timbers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata. (PAN: AABCR8486M) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 31.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 08.02.2019 For the Appellant Shri A. K. Sing, CIT, D…

Valentine Maritime (Gulf) Llc, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1034/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Valentine Maritime Vs. Dcit(It) 4 (3) (1) 16Th Floor, (Gulf) Llc 2004-2005, Montreal, B-31 Air India Building Shastri Nagar, Andheri (W), Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400053 Pan/Gir No.Aabcv1070B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…aforesaid principle laid in Dilip N. Shroff (supra) still holds good in spite of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UOI v/s Dharmendra Textile Processors (2008) 306 ITR 277 (SC). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT v/s Smt. Kaushalya & Ors., [1995] 216 ITR 660 (Bom), observed that notice issued under section 274 must reveal application of mind by the Assessing Officer and the assessee must be made aware of the exact charge on which he had to file his explanation. The Court observed, vagueness and ambiguity in the notice deprives the assessee of reasonable opportunity as he is unaware of the exact charg…

Sri Sukhendu Kumar Das, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 55(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 966/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 Sukhendu Kumar Das, AY 2012-13 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “D” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 966/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Sukhendu Kumar Das Vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd-55, Kolkata (PAN: ACPPD6661F) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 21.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 25.01.2019 For the Appellant Shri S. K. Roy, Advocate For the Respondent Shri Shankar Halder, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This appeal preferred by t…

Pawan Kumar Modi, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 49(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 950/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1 Pawan Kumar Modi, AY 2009-10 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “D” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 950/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Pawan Kumar Modi Vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd-49(2), Kolkata ( PAN: AESPM0259F) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 21.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 25.01.2019 For the Appellant Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR For the Respondent Shri Shankar Halder, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This appeal preferred by the asses…

The Banga Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, Banga vs. Income Tax Oficer, Nawanshahar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 363/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ankit Kumar Aggarwal, DR
Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. Ravish Sood, Judicial Member ITA No.358/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No.359/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No.362/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No.363/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Banga Co-operative Vs Income Tax Officer, Marketing Society Ltd., Dana Nawanshahar Mandi, Banga, Distt. SBS Nagar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAAAT6370M Assessee by : Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, CA Revenue by : Sh. Ankit Kumar Aggarwal, DR Date of Hearing : 11.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement…

The Banga Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, Banga vs. Income Tax Officer, Nawanshahar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 362/ASR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ankit Kumar Aggarwal, DR
Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. Ravish Sood, Judicial Member ITA No.358/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No.359/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No.362/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No.363/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Banga Co-operative Vs Income Tax Officer, Marketing Society Ltd., Dana Nawanshahar Mandi, Banga, Distt. SBS Nagar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAAAT6370M Assessee by : Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, CA Revenue by : Sh. Ankit Kumar Aggarwal, DR Date of Hearing : 11.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement…

The Banga Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, Banga vs. Income Tax Officer, Nawanshahar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 359/ASR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ankit Kumar Aggarwal, DR
Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. Ravish Sood, Judicial Member ITA No.358/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No.359/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No.362/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No.363/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Banga Co-operative Vs Income Tax Officer, Marketing Society Ltd., Dana Nawanshahar Mandi, Banga, Distt. SBS Nagar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAAAT6370M Assessee by : Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, CA Revenue by : Sh. Ankit Kumar Aggarwal, DR Date of Hearing : 11.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement…

The Banga Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, Banga vs. Income Tax Officer, Nawanshahar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 358/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ankit Kumar Aggarwal, DR
Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. Ravish Sood, Judicial Member ITA No.358/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No.359/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITA No.362/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No.363/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Banga Co-operative Vs Income Tax Officer, Marketing Society Ltd., Dana Nawanshahar Mandi, Banga, Distt. SBS Nagar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAAAT6370M Assessee by : Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, CA Revenue by : Sh. Ankit Kumar Aggarwal, DR Date of Hearing : 11.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement…

Sh. Maninder Singh Prop. M/S Dashmesh Bricks, Bathinda vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Bathinda

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 440/ASR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A No.440/Asr/2017 Assessment Year:2011-12

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R)
Section 268ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…/s. 274, there are several decisions by the Hon’ble High Courts, as in CIT v. Manu Engineering Works [1980] 122 ITR 306 (Guj); CIT vs. Mithila Motors (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Pat); CIT v. Chandulal [1985] 152 ITR 238 (AP); CIT vs. Kaushalya & Ors. [1994] 216 ITR 660 (Bom), holding it to be of little consequence, also clarifying the import of the notice u/s. 274. Again, it may be noted that these decisions are either under the 1922 Act or prior to the insertion of section 292B on the statute-book w.e.f. 1/10/1975 saving any omission in the notice. Further, reference in this context may also be made to decisio…

Navin Kumar Ladha, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 35(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 248/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & Sh. A.L.Saini[Assessment Year: 2014-15] Vs Navin Kumar Ladha, Ito, 121, N.S.Road, 3Rd Floor, Room Ward-35(2), No.29, Kolkata-700001. Kolkata. Pan-Aaxpl1537A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Anil Kochar, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Sankar Halder, Jcit Date Of Hearing 06.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 14.12.2018 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravithis Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.12.2017 Passed By Cit(A)-10, Kolkata For Ay 2014-15 Wherein He Confirmed The Penalty Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”). 2. The Ld.Ar Submits That The Issue Raised In The Appeal Is Covered By The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Ssa’S Emerald Meadows. He Also Submits That The Ao Imposed Penalty On Defective Notice Issued U/S. 274 R.W.S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On 27-12-2016, Copy Of The Same Is On Record At Page No.1 Of Paper Book & In View Of The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Supra The Imposition Of Penalty On Defective Is Not Maintainable. 3. The Ld.Ar, Further Submits That The Statutory Notice Dt. 27-12- 2016 Issued By The Ito, Ward-35(2), Kolkata U/S. 274 R.W.S 271 Of The Act Is Defective & By Placing Reliance On The Decision Of The Hon’Ble [Assessment Year: 2014-15]

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ving Equipment Service Corporation Vs. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai, (2017) 84 taxmann.com 51 (iii) Mahesh M.Gandhi Vs. ACIT Vs. ACIT ITA No.2976/Mum/2016 dated 27.2.2017. Reliance was placed on two decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court viz., (i) CIT Vs. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660(Bom) and (ii) M/S.Maharaj Garage & Co. Vs. CIT dated 22.8.2017. This decision was referred to in the written note given by the learned DR. This is an unreported decision and a copy of the same was not furnished. However a gist of the ratio laid down in the decision has been given in the written note filed before us. 9. In the case of CIT Vs. Kaus…

Satyanam Baksh Singh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 43(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 178/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & Sh. A.L.Saini[Assessment Year: 2010-11] Vs Satyanam Baksh Singh, Ito, C/O-S.L.Kochar, Advocate, 5, Ward-43(3), 3, Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue, Govt. Place Kolkata-700019. West, Kolkata- Pan-Albps1198R 700001. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. A. Kochar, Advocate Respondent By Sh. S. Halder, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 14.12.2018 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravithis Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By Cit(A)- 13, Kolkata For Ay 2010-11 Wherein He Confirmed The Penalty Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”). 2. The Ld.Ar Submits That The Issue Raised In The Appeal Is Covered By The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Ssa’S Emerald Meadows. He Also Submits That The Ao Imposed Penalty On Defective Notice Issued U/S. 274 R.W.S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On 31-12-2012, Copy Of The Same Is On Record At Page No.1 Of Paper Book & In View Of The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Supra The Imposition Of Penalty On Defective Is Not Maintainable. 3. The Ld.Ar, Further Submits That The Statutory Notice Dt. 31-12- 2012 Issued By The Ito, Ward-42(3), Kolkata U/S. 274 R.W.S 271 Of The Act Is Defective & By Placing Reliance On The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Karnataka High Court In The Case Of Cit Vs Ssa’S Emerald Meadows Supra In Ita No. 380 Of 2015 Dated 23.11.2015 Which Was Affirmed By The Hon’Ble Supreme Court By Dismissal Of Special Leave Petition (Slp)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ving Equipment Service Corporation Vs. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai, (2017) 84 taxmann.com 51 (iii) Mahesh M.Gandhi Vs. ACIT Vs. ACIT ITA No.2976/Mum/2016 dated 27.2.2017. Reliance was placed on two decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court viz., (i) CIT Vs. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660(Bom) and (ii) M/S.Maharaj Garage & Co. Vs. CIT dated 22.8.2017. This decision was referred to in the written note given by the learned DR. This is an unreported decision and a copy of the same was not furnished. However a gist of the ratio laid down in the decision has been given in the written note filed before us. 9. In the case of CIT Vs. Kaus…

M/S. Danish Music Corner, Kolkata vs. ITO - 31(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2233/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh.S.Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Vs M/S. Danish Music Corner, Ito, 7 Lenin Sarani, Ward-31(1), 10 B, Kolkata-700013. Middle Ton Row, 4Th Pan-Aadfd1476C Floor, Room No.-4, 5, Kolkata-700071. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. B.K.Singh, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Sankar Halder, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 12.12.2018 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravithis Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.08.2017 Passed By Cit(A)-9, Kolkata For Ay 2012-13 Wherein He Confirmed The Penalty Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”). 2. The Ld.Ar Submits That The Issue Raised In The Appeal Is Covered By The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Ssa’S Emerald Meadows. He Also Submits That The Ao Imposed Penalty On Defective Notice Issued U/S. 274 R.W.S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On 23-03-2015, Copy Of The Same Is On Record At Page No.1 Of Paper Book & In View Of The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Supra The Imposition Of Penalty On Defective Is Not Maintainable. 3. The Ld.Ar, Further Submits That The Statutory Notice Dt. 23-03- 2015 Issued By The Ito, Ward-31(1), Kolkata U/S. 274 R.W.S 271 Of The [Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ving Equipment Service Corporation Vs. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai, (2017) 84 taxmann.com 51 (iii) Mahesh M.Gandhi Vs. ACIT Vs. ACIT ITA No.2976/Mum/2016 dated 27.2.2017. Reliance was placed on two decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court viz., (i) CIT Vs. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660(Bom) and (ii) M/S.Maharaj Garage & Co. Vs. CIT dated 22.8.2017. This decision was referred to in the written note given by the learned DR. This is an unreported decision and a copy of the same was not furnished. However a gist of the ratio laid down in the decision has been given in the written note filed before us. 9. In the case of CIT Vs. Kaus…

M/S. Precision Transmision Chain, Hooghly vs. ITO, Ward - 24(2), Hooghly

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

ITA 158/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Halder,ld.Sr.DR
Section 263Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ITA No.158/Kol/2018 M/s. Precision Transmission Chain 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘D’, KOLKATA (Before Shri S. S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) ITA No. 158/Kol/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 M/s. Precision Transmission Vs Income Tax Officer Chain Ward 24(2), Hooghly PAN: AAEFP 2414K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.AR Respondent by : Shri S. Halder,ld.Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 05-12-2018 Date of Pronouncement:07.12.2018 ORDER Per Dr. A.L.Saini, A.M.: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2008-09…

Romit Mitra, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 24, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 600/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 600/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Romit Mitra -Vs- Acit, Circle-24, Kolkata. [Pan: Adppm 1678 N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ving Equipment Service Corporation Vs. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai, (2017) 84 taxmann.com 51 (iii) Mahesh M.Gandhi Vs. ACIT Vs. ACIT ITA No.2976/Mum/2016 dated 27.2.2017. Reliance was placed on two decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court viz., (i) CIT Vs. Kaushalya 216 ITR 660(Bom) and (ii) M/S.Maharaj Garage & Co. Vs. CIT dated 22.8.2017. This decision was referred to in the written note given by the learned DR. This is an unreported decision and a copy of the same was not furnished. However a gist of the ratio laid down in the decision has been given in the written note filed before us. 9. In the case of CIT Vs. Kau…