CIT v. Sohana Woollen Mills

Enkay Traffin (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT-4, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…275 ITR 43 A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdicti A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised on thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the in…

Smt. Usha Devi Modi, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-10(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S. S.Godara)

…Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Nitson & Amitsu Private Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Ravish Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Rachit Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Jaikishan Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Reeta Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Gopichand Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Pravesh Kumar Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Ritin Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Kaushal Kishore Bihani, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-45(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “ए” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH VIRTUAL COURT “A” KOLKATA Before Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kaushal Kishore Bihani Income Tax Officer, बनाम 75, Dhandevi Khanna Road, Ward-45(1), 3, Govt. / Phool Bagan, Nr. India Gas V/s. Place (West), Kolkata-001 Office,Kolkata-700 054 [PAN No.ADHPB 6485 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri S.M.Surana, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 28-09-2020 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date…

Anindita Steels Ltd., Jharkhand vs. Pr.CIT-2, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) 92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder A reference to the provisions of s. 263 sho…

Pushpa Devi Sonthalia, Kolkata vs. Principal CIT, Kolkata - 2, Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

…s Ltd., 341 ITR 293 (Karnataka); S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if the CIT finds that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken, were not enough to say that the order of the AO was erroneous or prejudici…

Skan Enterprise, Kolkata vs. Pr.C.I.T.-12, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, SC 1984; A. A. Doshi vs. JCIT, 256 ITR 685; Hindusthan Tin Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 275 ITR 43 (Del), distinguished. (Paras 90-92, 102) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOHANA WOOLLEN MILLS 296 ITR 238 (P&H HC) A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised A reference to the provisions of s. 263 shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be…

Philips India Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-IV, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1142/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Philips India Limited..........……………………………………....………………..…………………….….Appellant Earlier Known As Philips Electronics India Limited 7 No. Justice Chandra Madhab Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iv, Kolkata…….............…....................…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Shri Navneet Misra, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 27Th, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1142/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Philips India Limited..........……………………………………....………………..…………………….….Appellant Earlier known as Philips Electronics India Limited 7 No. Justice Chandra Madhab Road Kolkata – 700 020 [PAN : AABCP 9487 A] Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - IV, Kolkata…….............…....................…...Respondent Appearances by: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Shri Navneet Misra, Advocate, appeared on behalf of t…