Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v. ITO, ITA

106 ITD 129Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2007#9308 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 133Section 140(3)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 145(3)Section 269SSSection 269T

Judgments citing Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v. ITO, ITA

ANITA BASAK,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC 1(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2174/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Anita Basak Acit, Central Circle 1(1), C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Kolkata, Advocates, Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, 2, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Floor, Suite 110 Shanti Pally, 5 Th Floor, Vs. No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata, Eastern Metropolitian By Pass, West Bengal-700001, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahhpb5785B Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ruchika Sharma, DR
Section 1Section 133Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144ASection 145(3)Section 270ASection 271Section 271ASection 44A

…y audited u/s 44AB of the Act nonetheless, there may Anita Basak; A.Y. 2018-19 be being shortcomings in the books of account. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of Third Member decision in case of ACIT Vs. Aggarwal Construction Co. (2007) 106 ITD 129 (Chandigarh) dated 29.01.2007, wherein it has been held as under:- “15. I have reproduced the above extract from the assessment order to reject the finding recorded by the Assessing Officer in the penalty order, that no books of account were maintained by the assessee as baseless. It is not recorded in the assessment order that the Assessing Off…

ASHA SHANKARLAL TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 157/NAG/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jun 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2018-19 Smt. Asha Shankarlal Tanwani Vs. The Acit 01, Shankar Nagar, Pandhuna Central Circle 2(1) Chhindwara – 480 334 (M.P.) Nagpur Pan No.:Bnvpt 1763 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8 /6/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Aforesaid Appeal By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 8Th October 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)– 3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Addition, Therefore Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law. 2. On The Fact & Circumstances Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Income Determined By The Assessing Officer At Rs.15,02,106/- Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 115BSection 131Section 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 69A

…v/s ITO, ITA no.8001/Del./2018, order dated 04.06.2019; and viii) Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v/s ITO, ITA no.65/Srt./2017, order dated 10.02.2020; 9 Smt. Asha Shankarlal Tanwani vs ACIT, Central Circle2(1), Nagpur ix) ACIT v/s Aggarwal Construction Co., [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd. Trib.); x) Om PrakashKarnani v/s ACIT, [2021] TaxPub (DT) 841 (Jp. Trib.). During the course of the appellate proceeding the learned Counsel, in 9. support of his arguments relied upon the following case laws i) Girish V. YalakkishettarSujatha Buildings v/s ITO [2020] 58 CCH 0073 (Bang.Trib) ii) Honey Rahulan v/s ITO, ITA No. 150/Coch/202…

NIKITA SHANKARLAL TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 156/NAG/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jun 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ms. Nikita Shankar Lal Tanwani Vs. The Acit Near Shankar Mandir, Shankar Central Circle 2(1) Nagar, Pandhuna Pandhurna Nagpur Chhindwara – 480 334 (M.P.) Pan No.:Borpt 4644 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8 /6 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 8Th October 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2019-20. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 115BSection 131Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 69A

…TA no.1239/Bang./ 2019, order dated 11.09.2020; vii) Mr.Pradeep Jain v/s ITO, ITA no.8001/Del./2018, order dated 04.06.2019; and viii) Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v/s ITO, ITA no.65/Srt./2017, order dated 10.02.2020; ix) ACIT v/s Aggarwal Construction Co., [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd. Trib.); x) Om PrakashKarnani v/s ACIT, [2021] TaxPub (DT) 841 (Jp. Trib.). During the course of the appellate proceeding the learned 9. Counsel, in support of his arguments relied upon the following case laws i) Girish V. YalakkishettarSujatha Buildings v/s ITO [2020] 58 CCH 0073 (Bang.Trib) 10 ITA No.155/NAG.2021 Nikita Shankarlal Tanwani…

NIKITA SHANKARLAL TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 155/NAG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2018-19 Ms. Nikita Shankar Lal Tanwani Vs. The Acit Near Shankar Mandir, Shankar Central Circle 2(1) Nagar, Pandhuna Pandhurna Nagpur Chhindwara – 480 334 (M.P.) Pan No.:Borpt 4644 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8 /62022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 8Th October 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Addition, Therefore Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 115BSection 131Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

…TA no.1239/Bang./ 2019, order dated 11.09.2020; vii) Mr.Pradeep Jain v/s ITO, ITA no.8001/Del./2018, order dated 04.06.2019; and viii) Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v/s ITO, ITA no.65/Srt./2017, order dated 10.02.2020; ix) ACIT v/s Aggarwal Construction Co., [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd. Trib.); x) Om PrakashKarnani v/s ACIT, [2021] TaxPub (DT) 841 (Jp. Trib.). During the course of the appellate proceeding the learned Counsel, in 9. support of his arguments relied upon the following case laws i) Girish V. YalakkishettarSujatha Buildings v/s ITO [2020] 58 CCH 0073 (Bang.Trib) ii) Honey Rahulan v/s ITO, ITA No. 150/Coch/2020…

SHRI ANKIT SHANKARLAL TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 154/NAG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Ankit Shankar Lal Tanwani Vs. The Acit Near Shankar Mandir, Shankar Central Circle 2(1) Nagar, Pandhuna Pandhurna Nagpur Chhindwara – 480 334 (M.P.) Pan No.:Biapt 4756 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8/6 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 8Th October 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2019-20. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Addition, Therefore Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 115BSection 131Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 4Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

…TA no.1239/Bang./ 2019, order dated 11.09.2020; vii) Mr.Pradeep Jain v/s ITO, ITA no.8001/Del./2018, order dated 04.06.2019; and viii) Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v/s ITO, ITA no.65/Srt./2017, order dated 10.02.2020; ix) ACIT v/s Aggarwal Construction Co., [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd. Trib.); x) Om PrakashKarnani v/s ACIT, [2021] TaxPub (DT) 841 (Jp. Trib.). During the course of the appellate proceeding the learned Counsel, in 9. support of his arguments relied upon the following case laws i) Girish V. YalakkishettarSujatha Buildings v/s ITO [2020] 58 CCH 0073 (Bang.Trib) ii) Honey Rahulan v/s ITO, ITA No. 150/Coch/202…

ANKIT SHANKARLAL TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 153/NAG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Ankit Shankar Lal Tanwani Vs. The Acit Near Shankar Mandir, Shankar Central Circle 2(1) Nagar, Pandhuna Pandhurna Nagpur Chhindwara – 480 334 (M.P.) Pan No.:Biapt 4756 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8 / 6 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 8Th October 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Addition, Therefore Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 115BSection 131Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

…o.8001/Del./2018, order dated 04.06.2019; and viii) Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v/s ITO, ITA no.65/Srt./2017, order dated 10.02.2020; 9 ITA153/NAG/2021 Ankit Shankarlal Tanwani vs ACIT, Central Circle 2(1), Nagpur ix) ACIT v/s Aggarwal Construction Co., [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd. Trib.); x) Om PrakashKarnani v/s ACIT, [2021] TaxPub (DT) 841 (Jp. Trib.). During the course of the appellate proceeding the learned Counsel, in 9. support of his arguments relied upon the following case laws. i) Girish V. YalakkishettarSujatha Buildings v/s ITO [2020] 58 CCH 0073 (Bang.Trib) ii) Honey Rahulan v/s ITO, ITA No. 150/Coch/202…

HARSHA SANTOSH TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 161/NAG/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur07 Jun 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Harsha Santosh Tanwani Vs. The Acit Near Shankar Mandir, Shankar Central Circle 2(1) Nagar,Pandhuna, Pandhurna, Nagpur Chhindwara 480334 (M.P.) Pan No.:Bobpt 5794 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8 /6 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Aforesaid Appeal By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 8Thoctober 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2019-20. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Addition, Therefore Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 115BSection 131Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 69A

…TA no.1239/Bang./ 2019, order dated 11.09.2020; vii) Mr.Pradeep Jain v/s ITO, ITA no.8001/Del./2018, order dated 04.06.2019; and viii) Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v/s ITO, ITA no.65/Srt./2017, order dated 10.02.2020; ix) ACIT v/s Aggarwal Construction Co., [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd. Trib.); x) Om PrakashKarnani v/s ACIT, [2021] TaxPub (DT) 841 (Jp. Trib.). During the course of the appellate proceeding the learned 9. Counsel, in support of his arguments relied upon the following case laws i) Girish V. YalakkishettarSujatha Buildings v/s ITO [2020] 58 CCH 0073 (Bang.Trib) ii) Honey Rahulan v/s ITO, ITA No. 150/Coch/2020…

HARSHA SANTOSH TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 160/NAG/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur07 Jun 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Harsha Santosh Tanwani Vs. The Acit Near Shankar Mandir, Shankar Central Circle 2(1) Nagar,Pandhuna, Nagpur Pandhurna 480334 (M.P.) Pan No.:Bobpt 5794 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8 / 6 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Aforesaid Appeal By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 8Th October 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Addition, Therefore Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 115BSection 131Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 69A

…TA no.1239/Bang./ 2019, order dated 11.09.2020; vii) Mr.Pradeep Jain v/s ITO, ITA no.8001/Del./2018, order dated 04.06.2019; and viii) Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v/s ITO, ITA no.65/Srt./2017, order dated 10.02.2020; ix) ACIT v/s Aggarwal Construction Co., [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd. Trib.); x) Om PrakashKarnani v/s ACIT, [2021] TaxPub (DT) 841 (Jp. Trib.). During the course of the appellate proceeding the learned 9. Counsel, in support of his arguments relied upon the following case laws. 10 Harisha Santosh Tanwani vs ACIT, C.C-2(1), Nagpur i) Girish V. YalakkishettarSujatha Buildings v/s ITO [2020] 58 CCH 0073 (Bang.…

ASHA SHANKARLAL TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is party allowed

ITA 158/NAG/2021[2019-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur07 Jun 2022AY 2019-2021

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2019-20 Smt. Asha Shankarlal Tanwani Vs. The Acit 01, Shankar Nagar, Pandhuna Central Circle 2(1) Chhindwara – 480 334 (M.P.) Nagpur Pan No.:Bnvpt 1763 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8 / 6 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Aforesaid Appeal By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 8Th October 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2019-20. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Addition, Therefore Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 115BSection 131Section 139(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 69A

…l Tanwani vs ACIT, Central Circlr 2(1), Nagpur vii) Mr.Pradeep Jain v/s ITO, ITA no.8001/Del./2018, order dated 04.06.2019; and viii) Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v/s ITO, ITA no.65/Srt./2017, order dated 10.02.2020; ix) ACIT v/s Aggarwal Construction Co., [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd. Trib.); x) Om PrakashKarnani v/s ACIT, [2021] TaxPub (DT) 841 (Jp. Trib.). During the course of the appellate proceeding the learned 9. Counsel, in support of his arguments relied upon the following case laws i) Girish V. YalakkishettarSujatha Buildings v/s ITO [2020] 58 CCH 0073 (Bang.Trib) ii) Honey Rahulan v/s ITO, ITA No. 150/Coch/202…

M/S SHIV KUMAR BAIGARA AND COMPANY ,UDHAMPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER UDHAMPUR, UDHAMPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 358/ASR/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Mar 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No.358/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2001-02

For Appellant: Sh. P.N.Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271ASection 44A

…ccurred a confusion between the ‘books of account’, referred to in section 44AA and section 271A, and the ‘accounts’ referred to in section 145(3). The rejection of accounts per se would not, even as explained in Asst. CIT vs. Aggarwal Construction Co. [2007] 106 ITD 129 (Chd)(TM), attract section 271A. In my considered opinion, therefore, no case for penalty u/s. 271A is made out. I, accordingly, have no hesitation in directing deletion of the impugned penalty. I decide accordingly. 3 Shiv Kumar Baigra & Co. v. ITO 4. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on March…

AJIT PRASAD DEY,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WD-1, BANKURA, BANKURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 897/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2017AY 2011-2012
For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271A

…Ajit Prasad Dey I.T.A No. 897/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2011-12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA Before: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A No. 897/Kol/2015 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ajit Prasad Dey Appellant PAN:[ADAPD 9381 J] Vs I.T.O, Ward – 1, Bankura Respondent For the Appellant : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 24.08.2017 Date of pronouncement : 15.11.2017 ORDER Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM: This appeal by Assessee is arising out of order dated 21.04.2015…

Smt. KiranVallabhaiAhir v. ITO, ITA (106 ITD 129) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax