COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT & TP) vs. M/S. DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

e) Thus, the assessee Co. has wilfully, deliberately and intentionally concealed the particulars of the income to the extent of Rs.10.63 Crores for the A.Y. 2007-2008 while filing the original return of income on 31.10.2007. f) Apart from the above, the assessee has intentionally furnished inaccurate particulars as discussed above namely, Suspense and Advance

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1,KOLKATA vs. M/S PHALGUNI ENCLAVE PVT LTD

The appeal stands disposed of in

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Acting Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 8Th May, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. ...For Appellant Mr. S. Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. N. Mittal, Adv. …For Respondent The Court :- It Appears That There Is A Delay Of Twenty Days In Filing This Appeal. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Delay Condone Petition & We Find That Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. Hence, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. The Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Allowed. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.06.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench Kolkata (The Tribunal) In It(Ss) A No. 24/Kol/2021 & Co 05/Kol/2022 Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12.

2(22)(e) of the act ? vi) WHETHER the ld Tribunal is not justified in adjudicating the matter in favour of the assessee in view of the judgement of E 3 N Goakumar-vs-CIT (central) in (2016) 75 Taxman.com 215 (kerala)? vii) WHETHER the Ld Tribunal has erred in law in in observing the that the addition made