DCIT v. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao

GOPAL CHANDRA BOSE ,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD - 24(1), HOOGHLY , HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Gopal Chandra Bose.……………..............….……...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….......Appellant 188, Sarat Sarani Bally More Hooghly – 712 103 [PAN : ADUPB 3486 G] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-24(1), Hooghly.……......……….........…………..………….…............Respondent Appearances by: Shri Himadri Mukhopadhyay, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Pijush Mukherjee, JCIT D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : November 29th, 2018 Dat…

SMT. NILANJANA CHAKRABORTI,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 22, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Smt. Nilanjana Chakraborti…………..………...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….....Appellant 99B, Kankulia Road Kolkata – 700 029 [Pan : Acupc 49992 P] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-22, Kolkata.……......………………..........Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16Th , 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 9Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 03/08/2017, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14, On The Following Grounds:- “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding The Erroneous Determination Of Long Term Capital Gain At Rs.72,50,000/- By Ld. Dcit On Erroneous Belief & Misconception Of Law By Denying The Benefit Claimed U/S 54F Of Income Tax Act, 1961 Of The Appellant. 2. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Adduce Or Alter Any Ground Or Grounds On Or Before The Hearing Of The Appeal.”

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Smt. Nilanjana Chakraborti…………..………...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….....Appellant 99B, Kankulia Road Kolkata – 700 029 [PAN : ACUPC 49992 P] Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-22, Kolkata.……......………………..........Respondent Appearances by: Shri Manish Tiwari, A/R, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Sr. D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : October 16t…