PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S ROYAL TOUCH FABLON PRIVATE LIMITED

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ,HON'BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR

147 of the Act 4 by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 27.03.2021. We note that the assessee vide e-mail to the department on 30.03.2021 stated that the return filed originally may be treated as return filed in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. We also note that notice u/s. 143(2) was issued

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S DANIEL COMMODITIES PRIVATE LIMITED

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon'Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj & The Hon’Ble Justice Uday Kumar Date : 14Th January, 2026

Income Tax Act: Not readily available from the record". The Id. counsel referring to the aforesaid facts on the file has submitted that reopening of the assessment in this case was done without taking approval of the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. He, therefore, has submitted that the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. BINOD KUMAR TEKRIWAL

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed and the

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 15Th July, 2022. Appearance :- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant

addition at 3% of the bogus purchase and accordingly a sum of Rs.1,62,405/- was added to the total income of the assessee. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 10, Kolkata exercised his power under Section 263 of the Act. It is seen that the Assessing Officer himself had submitted before the PCIT that an error has occurred

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. MRS PREMLATA TEKRIWAL

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are

Bench: This Court In Itat/27/2022, Itat/32/2022 And

addition at 3% of the bogus purchase and accordingly a sum of Rs.1,62,405/- was added to the total income of the assessee. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 10, Kolkata exercised his power under Section 263 of the Act. It is seen that the Assessing Officer himself had submitted before the PCIT that an error has occurred

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)

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 in law in not considering that the transactions involved in the case were not only of highly suspicious nature, but the same

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)

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 in law in not considering that the transactions involved in the case were not only of highly suspicious nature, but the same

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. MANOJ JAIN

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ,HON'BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (A) Bench, Kolkata, this Court finds that the Tribunal held: 4. In the appellate proceedings, the assessee challenged the reopening of assessment, however the same was held to be validly done by the AO. 2 5. The Ld. A.R. vehemently submitted before us that the reopening of assessment as made by the AO u/s 147 read