CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd.

Sri Jayanta Saha, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 25, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

Smt. Aparna Biswas, North 24 Parganas vs. ITO, Ward - 49(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

Smt. Aparna Biswas, North 24 Parganas vs. ITO, Ward - 49(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

Rina Das, Siliguri vs. ITO, Ward - 2(2), Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Vs Rina Das, Ito, C/O-Subash Agarwal & Associates, Ward-2(2), Sidha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, 2Nd Siliguri, Aayakar Floor, Suite-213, Kolkata-700069. Bhawan, Paribahan Pan-Agmpd0221C Nagar, Matigara, Siliguri, Pin-734010. (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income- tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard…

ITO, WD-3(2), Suri, Birbhum vs. Sri Swapan Kumar Chakraborty, Birbhum

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

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

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

Versatile Wires Limted, Hooghly vs. DCIT, Circle-3, Kolkata

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

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A No. 940/Kol/2017 A.Y: 2008-09 Versatile Wires Limited Vs. D.C.I.T, Cir-3, Kolkata PAN: AAACV 8986D [Appellant] [Respondent] For the Appellant : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate, ld.AR For the Respondent : Shri S.Kumar, ld.Sr.DR Date of hearing : 31-08-2018 Date of pronouncement : 05-09-2018 ORDER Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi The above appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 19, Kolkata dt.30-01- 2017…

ITO, Ward - 13(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Ambey Retailers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Income Tax Officer V/S. M/S Ambey Retailers Pvt. Ward-13(1), 9Th Ltd. 29B, Rabidra Sarani, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-73 Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Aayakar [Pan No.Aahca 8700 F] Bhawan (Poorva), Kolkata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri R. Chowdhury, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant None ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 13-08-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-09-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Challenges Correctness Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 03.07.2017, Passed In Case No.472/Cit(A)-5/W-15(1)/15-16, Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Deleting Imposing Penalty Of ₹50,21,837/- Involving Proceedings U/S. 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. 2. We Have Heard Learned Departmental Representative Arguing In Favour The Above Impugned Penalty. Case File Perused. It Emerges First Of All That Cit(A)’S Detailed Discussion On The Issue Reads As Under:- “1. By Way Of Additional Ground The Objection Raised Is That The Ao Failed To Strike Off The Irrelevant Portion In The Notice Initiating Penalty U/S 271(1)(C)/ Section 274. Relying On The Decision Of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory & Others [2013] 359 Itr

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

J. K. Builders, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 47(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1692/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 J.K. Builders -Vs- Ito, Ward-47(2), Kolkata. [Pan: Aagfj 1596 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

Harvinder Singh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-33(2), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godara

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

Harvinder Singh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-33(2), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godara

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

Sujoy Deb, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 63(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 2050/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sujoy Deb -Vs- Ito, Ward-63(1), Kolkata. [Pan: Adrpd 6358 G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ecision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra). Reliance was also placed by the ITAT Mumbai in this decision on the decision of Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of CIT v. Mithila Motor's (P.) Ltd. [1984] 149 ITR 751 (Patna) wherein it was held that under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, all that is required is that the assessee should be given an opportunity to show cause. No statutory notice has been prescribed in this behalf. Hence, it is sufficient if the assessee was aware of the charges he had to meet and was given an opportunity of being heard.…

M/S. Zenith Life Style Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT(A)-3, Kolkata

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

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA Before: Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A No. 1928/Kol/2017 A.Y: 2010-11 M/s. Zenith Life Style Vs. Commissioner of Income- Pvt. Limited. Tax (Appeals),3 Kolkata PAN: AABCD 0086H [Appellant] [Respondent] For the Appellant : Varsha Jalan,, Advocate, ld.AR For the Respondent : Shri S. Mukherjee, Addl.CIT, ld.Sr.DR Date of hearing : 06-08-2018 Date of pronouncement : 10-08-2018 ORDER Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi The above appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner o…