PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9,KOLKATA vs. MANJU OSATWAL

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

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

D THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA ITAT/96/2021 IA NO.GA/1/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 9, KOLKATA VS. MANJU OSATWAL ITAT/96/2021 IA NO.GA/2/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 9, KOLKATA VS. MANJU OSATWAL For the appellant : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. For the respondent : Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. Heard on : 11th February, 2022. Judgment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) , KOLKATA vs. B.P.PODDAR FOUNDATION FOR EDUCATION

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

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

d) of the Act., for such reason the assessment was reopened under Section 147 of the Act by issuance of notice under Section 148 dated 13.03.2016. Subsequently, notices under Section 143(2) and Section 142(1) were issued. Pursuant to such notices the assessee through their authorized representative appeared before the Assessing Officer and produced details and documents and made

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT LTD

The appeals are dismissed and the substantial

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

d) WHETHER the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in quashing the reopening of the case U/s. 147 of the Act and in not adjudicating the merits of the case when there is the involvement of the issue of bogus purchase by the assessee? e) WHETHER the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT LTD

The appeals are dismissed and the substantial

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

d) WHETHER the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in quashing the reopening of the case U/s. 147 of the Act and in not adjudicating the merits of the case when there is the involvement of the issue of bogus purchase by the assessee? e) WHETHER the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. P L GOENKA HUF

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the substantial

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

d) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was justified in law by not considering the fact that the “tangible information for the purpose of reassessment contemplated under Section 147 of the Act would include “borrowed information” and the same ought not to be mistaken with

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-17, KOLKATA vs. M/S. RADHASHYAM TIRTHABASI PAUL

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

D. Ghosh, Adv. Mr. S. Sanyal, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Sujit Ghosh, Sr. Adv. (Samsung) Ms. Mannat Waraich, Adv. Mr. A. Behura, Adv Mr. Pujon Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Sutosom Bhattacharyya, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Boudhayan Bhattacharyaa, Adv. 4 No. 2 Ms. Stuti Bansai, Adv. For Ranbaxy Laboratories: Mr. Suman Basu, Adv. Pvt. Ltd. For the Respondent : Mr. Kumarjit

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

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

D. Ghosh, Adv. Mr. S. Sanyal, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Sujit Ghosh, Sr. Adv. (Samsung) Ms. Mannat Waraich, Adv. Mr. A. Behura, Adv Mr. Pujon Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Sutosom Bhattacharyya, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Boudhayan Bhattacharyaa, Adv. 4 No. 2 Ms. Stuti Bansai, Adv. For Ranbaxy Laboratories: Mr. Suman Basu, Adv. Pvt. Ltd. For the Respondent : Mr. Kumarjit

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. LAST PEAK DATA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

D. Ghosh, Adv. Mr. S. Sanyal, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Sujit Ghosh, Sr. Adv. (Samsung) Ms. Mannat Waraich, Adv. Mr. A. Behura, Adv Mr. Pujon Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Sutosom Bhattacharyya, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Boudhayan Bhattacharyaa, Adv. 4 No. 2 Ms. Stuti Bansai, Adv. For Ranbaxy Laboratories: Mr. Suman Basu, Adv. Pvt. Ltd. For the Respondent : Mr. Kumarjit

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. PARAMOUNT PROPERTIES & ESTATE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

D. Ghosh, Adv. Mr. S. Sanyal, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Sujit Ghosh, Sr. Adv. (Samsung) Ms. Mannat Waraich, Adv. Mr. A. Behura, Adv Mr. Pujon Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Sutosom Bhattacharyya, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Boudhayan Bhattacharyaa, Adv. 4 No. 2 Ms. Stuti Bansai, Adv. For Ranbaxy Laboratories: Mr. Suman Basu, Adv. Pvt. Ltd. For the Respondent : Mr. Kumarjit