State of Karnataka v. State of Tamil Nadu

3 SCC 362Reported decision2017#7111 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2021.

Judgments citing State of Karnataka v. State of Tamil Nadu

M/S. ORIGAMI CELLULO PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 394/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR-III)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92A(2)Section 92C

…ich legal consequences will follow. However, the legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 805/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…ich legal consequences will follow. However, the legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

DIPANJAN BASAK,KOLKATA vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1316/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…which legal consequences will follow. However, a legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

AZHARUL HAQUE,KOLKATA vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1313/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…which legal consequences will follow. However, a legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

BISWAJIT SWAIN,HOOGHLY vs. CIT(IT&TP), KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1312/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…which legal consequences will follow. However, a legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

BALAKALYAN CHOWDARY MARATHU,KADAPA vs. CIT(IT&TP), KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1310/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…which legal consequences will follow. However, a legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

SAMIR KUMAR NAYAK ,BALASORE vs. CIT(IT&TP), KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1309/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…which legal consequences will follow. However, a legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

LISA DAS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT (IT), CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1307/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…which legal consequences will follow. However, a legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

MAHESH KUMAR,BANGALORE vs. CIT(IT&TP), KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1303/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…which legal consequences will follow. However, a legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

KHETAWAT PROPERTIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4,, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 578/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…which legal consequences will follow. However, a legal consequence cannot be deemed[DCM Vs. State of Rajasthan (1996) 2 SCC 449. AIR 1996 SC 2930 (3 judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court) and same view reiterated in State of Karnataka Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2017) 3 SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not…

SHRI DEBANJAN DAS GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1315/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…1 SA Nos. 99-104/Kol/2019 & ITA Nos. 1304,1306,1308,1311,1314&1315/Kol/2019 AY- 2014-15 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] S.A. No.103/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 1314/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (IT & Plot No. X 1-7, Block EP/G, Sector-V, TP), Kolkata BCS Building, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700 091. (PAN: AHLPC7400N) Appellant Respondent & S.A. No.9…

SHRI BODHISATTAVA CHATTOPADHYAY,KOLKATA vs. CIT(IT&TP), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1314/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…1 SA Nos. 99-104/Kol/2019 & ITA Nos. 1304,1306,1308,1311,1314&1315/Kol/2019 AY- 2014-15 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] S.A. No.103/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 1314/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (IT & Plot No. X 1-7, Block EP/G, Sector-V, TP), Kolkata BCS Building, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700 091. (PAN: AHLPC7400N) Appellant Respondent & S.A. No.9…

MALAY GHOSH,MIDNAPOIRE vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1311/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…1 SA Nos. 99-104/Kol/2019 & ITA Nos. 1304,1306,1308,1311,1314&1315/Kol/2019 AY- 2014-15 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] S.A. No.103/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 1314/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (IT & Plot No. X 1-7, Block EP/G, Sector-V, TP), Kolkata BCS Building, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700 091. (PAN: AHLPC7400N) Appellant Respondent & S.A. No.9…

RAVI KIRAN SINHA,DHANBAD vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1308/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…1 SA Nos. 99-104/Kol/2019 & ITA Nos. 1304,1306,1308,1311,1314&1315/Kol/2019 AY- 2014-15 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] S.A. No.103/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 1314/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (IT & Plot No. X 1-7, Block EP/G, Sector-V, TP), Kolkata BCS Building, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700 091. (PAN: AHLPC7400N) Appellant Respondent & S.A. No.9…

NAYAN MUKHERJEE,KOLKATA vs. ACIT (IT), CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1306/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…1 SA Nos. 99-104/Kol/2019 & ITA Nos. 1304,1306,1308,1311,1314&1315/Kol/2019 AY- 2014-15 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] S.A. No.103/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 1314/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (IT & Plot No. X 1-7, Block EP/G, Sector-V, TP), Kolkata BCS Building, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700 091. (PAN: AHLPC7400N) Appellant Respondent & S.A. No.9…

SHRI HIMADRI MALLICK,KOLKATA vs. CIT (IT&TP), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1304/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…1 SA Nos. 99-104/Kol/2019 & ITA Nos. 1304,1306,1308,1311,1314&1315/Kol/2019 AY- 2014-15 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] S.A. No.103/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 1314/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (IT & Plot No. X 1-7, Block EP/G, Sector-V, TP), Kolkata BCS Building, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700 091. (PAN: AHLPC7400N) Appellant Respondent & S.A. No.9…