West Bengal State Electricity Board v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range

278 ITR 218High Court2005#2127 most cited

What is West Bengal State Electricity Board v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range authority for?

A question of law concerning the root of jurisdiction can be raised for the first time before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. A defect of jurisdiction is incurable, and jurisdiction, which cannot be conferred by default or agreement, is determined by its initiation date and operates prospectively, not retrospectively.

54

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

West Bengal State Electricity Board v Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax · 278 ITR 218 · Section 254 · Income Tax Appellate Tribunal · question of law · root of jurisdiction · Assessing Officer jurisdiction · prospective retrospective · incurable defect of jurisdiction · nullity of assessment · Section 120 · Section 127

Sections most often in play

Section 120Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 292BBSection 127Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 124(1)section 124(3)section 127(1)section 120section 2(7a)section 292bbsection 124section 292bsection 127section 158bdsection 292section 29

Judgments citing West Bengal State Electricity Board v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range

Maa Pahari Mercantiles(P)Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 359/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.359/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Maa Pahari Mercantiles Pvt. Ltd.………………………….…....Appellant 9, Weston Street, 214, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700012. [Pan: Aabcm7545A] Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(2), Kolkata……..................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 03, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 26,2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 02.01.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A) Is Arbitrary, Illegal & Bad In Law. 2. For That Assessment Order Itself Bad In Law In View Of The Fact That The Notice U/S 143(2) Taking Up The Case Under Scrutiny Was Without Jurisdiction.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…/2011.” I.T.A No.359/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2014-15 M/s Maa Phari Mercantiles Pvt. Ltd 9.2. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987- 88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yes Whether jurisdiction of Assessing Author…

Balmukund M Vaishnav, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat

ITA 205/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Balmukund M. Vaishnav, Surat. 5B/1054, Ramnanth Mahadev Ni Sheri, Haripura, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aokpv5065Q (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.205/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2013-14) Balmukund M. Vaishnav, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), 5B/1054, Ramnanth Mahadev Ni Surat. Sheri, Haripura, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aokpv5065Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…ection 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011." 9.2 The Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range-I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:— "Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…

Girik Estate Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward 6(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 170/KOL/2022[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…ion 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011.” 9.2.The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…

Amtek Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 138/KOL/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 144(1)Section 234A

…on 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011.” 9.2. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…

Shri Mir Zardari Qureshi, Durg vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1), Bhilai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 78/RPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.78/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Mir Zardari Qureshi, 167, Near Chunabhatti, Takia Para, Ward-6, Durg (C.G.) Pan : Aadpq6523D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148

…sdiction of the A.O and have no relevance in so far the inherent jurisdiction is concerned. 16. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in its order passed in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr (2005) 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) had observed that it is an admitted proposition that no jurisdiction can be conferred by default or aby agreement and a decision without jurisdiction is nullity. It was further observed by drawing support from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the 13 Shri Mir Zardari Qureshi Vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhilai case of Kiran Singh Vs.…

Shreemati Jaswanti Devi L/H of Late Shri Randhir Singh Dahiya, Bhilai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Bhilai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 13/RPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.13/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

…sdiction of the A.O and have no relevance in so far the inherent jurisdiction is concerned. 18. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in its order passed in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr (2005) 278 ITR 218 (Cal.), had observed that it is an admitted proposition that no jurisdiction can be conferred by default or agreement and a decision without jurisdiction is nullity. The Hon’ble Court by drawing support from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kiran Singh Vs. Chaman Paswan, AIR 1954 SC 340 (Para 6), had observed that a defect…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. M/S Weedo Ventures Pvt Ltd

ITAT/135/2022HC Calcutta03 Jan 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 3Rd January, 2023. Appearance : Mr. Smarajit Roy Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Soumen Bhattacharyya, Adv. ..For Appellant Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. P. Jhunjhunwalla, Adv. …For Respondentr: The Court:- This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [The Act] Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.4.2021 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata [Tribunal] In Ita No.2535/Kol/2019 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Question Of Law For Consideration : 1. Whether The Learned Tribunal Has Committed Substantial Error In Law By Quashing The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Kolkata On The Ground Of Lack Of Jurisdiction Without Considering Sub-Section (2) Of Section 124 Of The Act, 1961 & Sub-Section (3) Of 127 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether The Learned Tribunal Has Committed Substantial Error In Law In Quashing The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Even Though The Assessee Did Not Challenge The Point Of

Section 124Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 260A

…O-53 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/135/2022 IA No. GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, KOLKATA Vs M/S. WEEDO VENTURES PVT. LTD. BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 3rd January, 2023. Appearance : Mr. Smarajit Roy Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Soumen Bhattacharyya, Adv. ..for appellant Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. P. Jhunjhunwalla, Adv. …for respondentR: The Court:- This appeal filed by the revenue under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] is directed against the order dat…

Sh. Sunil Khullar, Samrala vs. DCIT, Circle, Khanna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavi.T.A. No.137/Chandi/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Sunil Khullar........................... ………................……............…..….. Appellant C/O Sat Parkash & Company, Ward No.7, H.No.10, Kang Mohalla, Samrala. [Pan:Azqpk0380E] Vs. Dcit, Circle-Khanna....................................................…..............……. Respondent Appearances By: Shri J. S. Bhasin, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sarabjeet Singh, Cit, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 27, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 30, 2022 Order

Section 120Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 150(1)Section 250Section 40A(3)Section 68

…on 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011.” 9.2. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authori…

Amiya Gopal Dutta, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 1(1), Jpg

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 126/KOL/2022[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 144Section 292B

…ion 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011.” 9.2.The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…

D.Usha Reddy, Visakhapatnam vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Visakhapatnam

ITA 602/VIZ/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.602/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) D Usha Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer 312 Mvv Mk Royal Gardens Ward 1(4) Waltair Uplands Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Acppd9238E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.P.G.Mudaliar, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…essee could never have been found to be legal or resurrected." 8.16. While deciding the issue in the case of Mahalchand Motilal Kothari & Co., (supra) the ITAT relied on the Judgement of Calcutta High Court in the case of "West Bengal State Electricity Board"278 ITR 218. In that case the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court held that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by default or by agreement and the decision without jurisdiction is a nullity. The Hon'ble High Court also relied on a number of Judgements while arriving at such a conclusion. 8.17. The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of V.P. Electronics Corporation…

M/S J R Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., Gujrat vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2534/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.2534/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S J R Roadlines Pvt. Ltd..............................................…………………Appellant Plot No.14, Sector 8, Gandhidham, Kutch, Gujarat-370201. [Pan: Aadcp9373R] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata………...........……………….....………..…..Respondent Present: For The Assessee: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar For The Department: Shri Praveen Kishore, Cit-Dr, On 06.01.2022 Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit-Dr, On 26.05.2022 Date Of Hearing : January 06, 2022 & May 26, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 27, 2022 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 01.10.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Kolkata [Hereinafter As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT-DR, on 06.01.2022
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…on 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011.” 9.2. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…

Ruchi Roongta, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-45(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5/KOL/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata31 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 148

…1 Ruchi Roongta, AY: 2013-14 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 5/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Smt. Ruchi Roongta Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-45(4), (PAN: ACHPC6272B) . Kolkata Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 15.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement 31.03.2022 For the Appellant Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate For the Revenue Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT ORDER This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 23.12.2021 for AY 2013-14. 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR of th…

Anderson Printing House(P)Ltd, Hooghly vs. ACIT, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 339/KOL/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2021AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.339/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Anderson Printing House Pvt. Ltd….…..…...………………………….……Appellant C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, “Seben Brothers’ Lodge”, P.O. Buroshibtala, P.S. – Chinsurah, Dist.- Hooghly, West Bengal – 712105. [Pan:Aacca1977D] Vs. Acit, Circle-9(1), Kolkata…………………………………….………..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 28, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 28, 2021 Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Against The Order Dated 20.07.2021 Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250

…on 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011.” 9.2. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…

Hirak Sarkar, Hooghly vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-23(1), Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 850/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.850/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hirak Sarkar……………….………..…...………………………….……Appellant 37/C, Bose Para Lane, Serampore, Hooghly-712202. [Pan: Akaps2117A] Vs. Acit, Circle-23(1), Hooghly……………………………...………..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 15, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 12, 2021 Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Against The Order Dated 22.02.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-6, Kolkata.

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 148Section 151Section 68Section 69C

…T instruction No. 1/2011.” 8 I.T.A. No.850/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hirak Sarkar 9.2. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…

Gaya Prasad Bajaj, Allahabad vs. ITO, Allahabad

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

ITA 375/ALLD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad04 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2012-13 Gaya Prasad Bajaj, V. Income Tax Officer, 34-A, Chak Zero Road, Ward-1(2) Allahabad, U.P. Allahabad, U.P. Pan-Aampb9895N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Abhinav Mehrotra, C.A. Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.08.2021

For Appellant: Mr. Abhinav Mehrotra, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…RT 391 (Del.) Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. vs. R.R. Gupta (1976) 38 STC 113,117 (SC) Sant Baba Mohan singh vs. CIT 91973) 90 ITR 197, 199 (Alld.) Sitaram Rathore vs. CIT 91981) 130 ITR 699 (Alld.) West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Dy. CIT (2005) 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) Abhishek Jain vs. ITO (2018) 94 taxman.com 355 (Del.) 7. I have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant record. Both the parties have argued at length on the legal issue raised by the assessee challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment under section 143(3). It is pertinent to note that th…

M/S Eversafe Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-5(3), Kolkata

ITA 604/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292BSection 68

…on 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011." 9.2. The Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range - I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…

Cosmat Traders (P) Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 457/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2021AY 2012-13
Section 120Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

…case of West Bengal State The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows: reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of Powers of - Assessment years 1983 years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by ut of facts found by authorities and which…

M/S. Weedo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As M/S. Equal Projects Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata vs. CIT(A)-3, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee

ITA 2535/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Weedo Ventures Pvt. Ltd......……………………..................................……………..…….............Appellant [Earlier Known As M/S. Equal Projects Pvt. Ltd.] Property No. 11 Block-A, Maharana Pratap Enclave Pitampura Delhi - 110034 [Pan : Aacce 4580 C]

Section 14ASection 2Section 250

…e of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows: reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of Powers of - Assessment years 1983 years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by Whether a question of law arising out of fa…

M/S. Weedo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As M/S. Equal Projects Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata vs. I.T. O., Ward, 9(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee

ITA 2129/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Weedo Ventures Pvt. Ltd......……………………..................................……………..…….............Appellant [Earlier Known As M/S. Equal Projects Pvt. Ltd.] Property No. 11 Block-A, Maharana Pratap Enclave Pitampura Delhi - 110034 [Pan : Aacce 4580 C]

Section 14ASection 2Section 250

…e of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows: reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of Powers of - Assessment years 1983 years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by Whether a question of law arising out of fa…

Bindhyawasini Devilopers Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-13(1), Kolkata

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2519/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…on 143(2) was not done by Income-tax Officers as specified in CBDT instruction No. 1/2011.” 9.2. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of West Bengal State Electricity Board vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range – I, reported in [2005] 278 ITR 218 (Cal.) has held as follows:- “Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Whether a question of law arising out of facts found by authorities and which went to root of jurisdiction can be raised for first time before Tribunal - Held, yesWhether jurisdiction of Assessing Authorit…