HEH the Nizam’s Supplementary Family Trust v. CIT, 242 ITR 381 (SC) (2) CIT v. Sambhudayal Dwarkadas

Adonis Marketing (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 9(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

…the Tribunal are based on valid materials and evidence and we do not find any error or illegality in the order of the Tribunal so as to warrant interference.” 6. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court, itself, in Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. vs. ACIT (no. 2) [2004] 266 ITR 664 (All) has observed as under: “It is well settled that notice under section 148 cannot be issued when assessment proceedings are pending vide CIT v. Ranchhoddas Karsondas [1959] 36 ITR 569 (SC), CIT v. S.RamanChettiar [19 65] 55 ITR 630 (SC), N.NaganathaIyer v. CIT [1966] 60 ITR 647 (Mad.), Ram Bilas Kedar Nath v. ITO [1963] 47 ITR 586 (All.), Dr…

ITO, WD.9(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata……………….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…..…..... Respondent 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] C.O. No.6/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…....... Cross-Objector 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] Vs Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata …………..….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 07, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: This Appeal By The Revenue & Corresponding Cross-Objection By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated 08.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

…es were served to exercise its discretion to assume jurisdiction even if such service of notice is an integral part of the cause of action or even if it prima facie appears to be without jurisdiction.” e) In jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. vs. ACIT (no. 2) [2004] 266 ITR 664 (All) wherein the Allahabad High Court held as under (page 666 of 266 ITR): “12. Be that as it may, there is no dispute that once the CIT (Appeals) passed an order of remand on 15-3-1994, sic the assessment proceedings became pending before the Assessing Officer. 13. It is well settled that notice under section 148 cannot be issued when assessmen…