(i) Star India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, 143 TTJ 307(Mum. Trib.) (ii) B S Sangwan v. ITO

54 SOT 172Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#18051 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 54ESection 54FSection 54G

Issues it is cited on

disallowance under section 14aerroneous and prejudicialsection 14asection 263section 26section 142section 142(1)section 143companysection 14section 143(3)india

Judgments citing (i) Star India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, 143 TTJ 307(Mum. Trib.) (ii) B S Sangwan v. ITO

Shilpi Modi, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(2), Kolkata

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1965/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2026AY 2022-2023
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

…t aside the decision of the Commissioner on the ground that the show-cause notice indicated a specific purpose but the matter was dealt with on another count after the receipt of the reply. The Tribunal relied on a view taken by a coordinate bench reported at 54 SOT 172 (Visuvius India Limited v. CIT) and a judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported at 211 ITR 336 (CIT v. G.K. Kabra). In both cases, it was held that if the object of the notice was one and the matter was treated for a different purpose in the ultimate order, that may not be the appropriate exercise of the jurisdiction. In the light of a po…

Ravi Modi, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(2), Kolkata

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1964/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2026AY 2022-2023
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

…t aside the decision of the Commissioner on the ground that the show-cause notice indicated a specific purpose but the matter was dealt with on another count after the receipt of the reply. The Tribunal relied on a view taken by a coordinate bench reported at 54 SOT 172 (Visuvius India Limited v. CIT) and a judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported at 211 ITR 336 (CIT v. G.K. Kabra). In both cases, it was held that if the object of the notice was one and the matter was treated for a different purpose in the ultimate order, that may not be the appropriate exercise of the jurisdiction. In the light of a po…

Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 919/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Pcit-2 Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan P-7, Mandawa Shikhar, 151, Sarat Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Bose Road, Kolkata-700026, Vs. 700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaecr8231M Assessee By : Shri S.M. Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.02.2024

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM PCIT-2 Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan P-7, Mandawa Shikhar, 151, Sarat Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Bose Road, Kolkata-700026, Vs. 700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AAECR8231M Assessee by : Shri S.M. Surana, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Datta, DR Date of hearing: 19.12.2024 Date of pronouncement : 11.02.2024 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Pr. Commissioner of Income, Kolkata-2 (herein…

ITO 2(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Canara Bank Securities Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 821/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer-2(1)(4), M/S Canara Bank Securities Room No.553, 5Th Floor, Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 7Th Floor, Maker Chamber-Iii, Vs. M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaacg2218H

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263oSection 56

…ground. The assessee company relied upon the following decisions to support its above-stated proposition as under: (i) Star India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, 143 TTJ 307(Mum. Trib.) (ii) B S Sangwan v. ITO ,67 SOT 447 (Del. Trib.) (iii) Vesuvius India Limited v. CIT , 54 SOT 172(Kol. Trib.) (iv) CIT v. Contimeters Electricals Pvt. Ltd. , 317 ITR 249(Del.) (v) CIT v. G K Kabra , 211 ITR 336 (AP) 8 Canara Bank Securities Ltd. (vi) CIT v. Ashish Rajpal , 320 ITR 674. The assessee company submitted that if two views are possible and the AO has taken one view which is a possible view, then the assessment orders cannot be held…

Infinity Infotech, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 329/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Dilip S.Damle, FCA &For Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 35Section 35(1)(iii)Section 35A

…ch is not set out in the show cause notice u/s 263 of the Act. In this regard the ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions of the Tribunal a) Damodar Valley Corpn vs CIT 72 taxmann 127 (ITAT Kol) b) Vesuvius India Limited vs CIT 54 SOT 172 (ITAT Kol) c) B.S.Sangwan vs ITO 67 SOT 447 (ITAT Delhi) (c ) That the AO had in fact made proper and due enquiries of all the aspects set out by the CIT in the show cause notice u/s 263 of the Act. In this regard he drew our attention to the various pages of the paper book which would throw light on the fact as proper and due enquiries were made…

(i) Star India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, 143 TTJ 307(Mum. Trib.) (ii) B S Sangwan v. ITO (54 SOT 172) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax