PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-2 vs. M/S. EXPERT JEWELLERS PVT LTD

The appeals are disposed of

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

house property”. The reasons in support of this decision were sought to be advanced in paragraph 5 of the tribunal’s order which is set out below:- “5. The law in this regard has been recently laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bangalore Club v/s. CIT 350 ITR 509 (SC), where the question

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S GANESH REALTY AND MALL DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same stands dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed challenging the order dated 22nd July, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’ in short) in ITA No.1621/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2010-11. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether the Learned Income

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHELTER PROJECT LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(the Act) as directed against the order dated 17th October, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.737/Kol/2014 for the assessment year 2009-10. The revenue has raised the following substantial question of law for consideration: A. Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , KOL - III, KOL vs. M/S. MEENAKSHI TEA CO. LTD

Appeal is dismissed”

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ for brevity) is directed against the order dated 4th July, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.1511/Kol/2012 for the assessment year 2009-10. The revenue has raised for the following substantial question of law for consideration: (a) Whether on the facts and circumstances

PRINCIPAL COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOL 2 KOLKATA vs. INDIAN BANK

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: :

260A of the Income Tax, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated February 8, 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos.306 and 649/Kol/2013 for the assessment year 2009-10. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration :- “(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. ARUNAVA BHATTACHARJEE

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 9th June, 2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench – B, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA/203/Kol/2022 for the assessment year 2016-17. The revenue raised the following substantial questions of law : “a) Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in allowing

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-4, KOLKATA vs. PAHARPUR PRAGNYA TECH PARK PVT. LTD.

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (the Act, in brevity) is directed against the order dated 27.7.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Hyderabad (Tribunal) in ITA Nos.355 & 356/Hyd/2012 for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The revenue has raised the following substantial question of law for our consideration. a. Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, KOLKATA vs. SMT. SHIKHA ROY

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed challenging the order dated 25th November, 2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’ in short) in ITA No.1915/Kol/2019 for the assessment year 2016-17. The revenue has raised the following substantial question of law: 2 (i) Whether on the facts

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA -2, KOLKATA vs. KALYANPUR CEMENTS LTD.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 14th October, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos. 1396/Kol/2011 and ITA No. 1397/Kol/2011 for the Assessment Years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: 1. Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3, vs. OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LTD.

Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act for brevity) is directed against the order dated 20th November, 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA/192/Kol/2013 for the assessment year 2009-2010. The Revenue has suggested the following substantial questions of law for consideration :- 1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S EMPORIS PROPERTIES PVT LTD

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 30Th March, 2023 Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. ...For The Appellant Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. S. Gupta, Adv. ...For The Respondent. The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’ For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd September, 2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In

PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 30th March, 2023 Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. ...for the appellant Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. S. Gupta, Adv. ...for the respondent. The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX 4, KOLKATA vs. SRI SANDIP GOSWAMI

The appeal stands disposed of on the ground

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date: November 23, 2021. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. Radha Mohan Roy, Adv. … For The Appellant Re: Ia No:Ga/1/2017 (Old No. Ga/1842/2017) In Itat/215/2017 The Court : This Application Has Been Filed To Condone The Delay In Preferring The Appeal. We Have Heard Mr. Radha Mohan Roy, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant/Revenue. There Is A Delay Of 21

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, in brevity) is directed against the order dated 18.11.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata “C” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.71/KOL/2014 for the Assessment Year 2009-10. The Revenue has raised the following substantial question of law for consideration: (a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case

M/S. SOUTH CITY PROJECTS (KOLKATA) LIMITED vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-4

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 1St December, 2021 Appearance :-

260A of the Income Tax, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 21st June, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 1543/Kol/2014 for the 2 assessment year 2009-10. The assessee has raised the following substantial question of law for consideration :- i) Whether deduction under the provisions of Section

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -II, KOLKATA vs. ASHOK KUMAR PODDAR

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Such an appeal is admissible and can be heard only if a substantial question of law is involved. If the adjudication of facts by the lower adjudicating authority is such as to render the decision perverse or most unreasonable, a substantial question of law is said to arise from the said order

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. TANUJ PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED

The appeal stands disposed of with the above direction

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 14Th July, 2025.

PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED BEFORE : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM -A N D- HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS) DATE : 14th July, 2025. Mr. Aryak Dutt, Adv. Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. Mr. Ankan Das, Adv. Ms. Shradhya Ghosh, Adv….for appellant. Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Ms. Sruti Datta, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Singhi, Adv. …for respondent. The Court : This

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5,KOLKATA vs. SWATI BAJAJ

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 263 could not have been exercised and such power could have been exercised only when the assessing officer failed to conduct an enquiry which is not the case of the assessee before this Court. With regard to under what circumstances the power under Section 263 could be invoked and the parameters to be fulfilled, reliance was placed

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA vs. KRISHNA KUMAR PARSURAMKA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 263 could not have been exercised and such power could have been exercised only when the assessing officer failed to conduct an enquiry which is not the case of the assessee before this Court. With regard to under what circumstances the power under Section 263 could be invoked and the parameters to be fulfilled, reliance was placed

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. SURAJ SAHANA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 263 could not have been exercised and such power could have been exercised only when the assessing officer failed to conduct an enquiry which is not the case of the assessee before this Court. With regard to under what circumstances the power under Section 263 could be invoked and the parameters to be fulfilled, reliance was placed