DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

section 143(3) of the Act and no such additions (estimated addition) was made in the case of the appellant for any of the preceding or subsequent assessment year. 4. That the appellant craves leaves to amend, alter, modify, add to, abridge and/or rescind any or all of the above grounds in future.” 4. The Revenue is in appeal before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

section 143(3) of the Act and no such additions (estimated addition) was made in the case of the appellant for any of the preceding or subsequent assessment year. 4. That the appellant craves leaves to amend, alter, modify, add to, abridge and/or rescind any or all of the above grounds in future.” 4. The Revenue is in appeal before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

section 143(3) of the Act and no such additions (estimated addition) was made in the case of the appellant for any of the preceding or subsequent assessment year. 4. That the appellant craves leaves to amend, alter, modify, add to, abridge and/or rescind any or all of the above grounds in future.” 4. The Revenue is in appeal before

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

section 143(3) of the Act and no such additions (estimated addition) was made in the case of the appellant for any of the preceding or subsequent assessment year. 4. That the appellant craves leaves to amend, alter, modify, add to, abridge and/or rescind any or all of the above grounds in future.” 4. The Revenue is in appeal before

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,AGARTALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - UDAIPUR , AGARTALA

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

TDS or not. Even if said ledger account is perused, it is obvious that the entries therein were required to be explained along with supporting documents. For instance, in the said ledger account comprising 27 entries, there are payments made to entities such as Shri P.R. Mukhopadhyay. In the absence of further details, it can only be speculated that

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,TRIPURA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

TDS or not. Even if said ledger account is perused, it is obvious that the entries therein were required to be explained along with supporting documents. For instance, in the said ledger account comprising 27 entries, there are payments made to entities such as Shri P.R. Mukhopadhyay. In the absence of further details, it can only be speculated that

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,AGARTALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - UDAIPUR , AGARTALA

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

TDS or not. Even if said ledger account is perused, it is obvious that the entries therein were required to be explained along with supporting documents. For instance, in the said ledger account comprising 27 entries, there are payments made to entities such as Shri P.R. Mukhopadhyay. In the absence of further details, it can only be speculated that

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA , AGARTALA

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

TDS or not. Even if said ledger account is perused, it is obvious that the entries therein were required to be explained along with supporting documents. For instance, in the said ledger account comprising 27 entries, there are payments made to entities such as Shri P.R. Mukhopadhyay. In the absence of further details, it can only be speculated that

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED ,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

TDS or not. Even if said ledger account is perused, it is obvious that the entries therein were required to be explained along with supporting documents. For instance, in the said ledger account comprising 27 entries, there are payments made to entities such as Shri P.R. Mukhopadhyay. In the absence of further details, it can only be speculated that

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED ,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

TDS or not. Even if said ledger account is perused, it is obvious that the entries therein were required to be explained along with supporting documents. For instance, in the said ledger account comprising 27 entries, there are payments made to entities such as Shri P.R. Mukhopadhyay. In the absence of further details, it can only be speculated that

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED ,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

TDS or not. Even if said ledger account is perused, it is obvious that the entries therein were required to be explained along with supporting documents. For instance, in the said ledger account comprising 27 entries, there are payments made to entities such as Shri P.R. Mukhopadhyay. In the absence of further details, it can only be speculated that

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED ,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

TDS or not. Even if said ledger account is perused, it is obvious that the entries therein were required to be explained along with supporting documents. For instance, in the said ledger account comprising 27 entries, there are payments made to entities such as Shri P.R. Mukhopadhyay. In the absence of further details, it can only be speculated that

SUBHASH CHAND CHORARIA,GUWAHATI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 115BBE of the Act and the Ld. CIT(A) not being justified in partially sustaining the addition of ₹7,42,397/- out of the same. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the assessee had filed the return of income showing total income of ₹27,41,140/- and the notice for hearing was issued to furnish certain particulars

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

section 143(3) on 30.03.2016. If this information was possessed by the Revenue in 2014, then why, while assessing the income of the assessee from assignment of sub-contract of the above projects was accepted by the Revenue. It could have been enquired at that point of time and assessee could be show-caused that it is a bogus profit

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

section 143(3) on 30.03.2016. If this information was possessed by the Revenue in 2014, then why, while assessing the income of the assessee from assignment of sub-contract of the above projects was accepted by the Revenue. It could have been enquired at that point of time and assessee could be show-caused that it is a bogus profit

M/S. NORTH EASTERN ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LTD.,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

27. So far as the remaining issues that whether the view taken by the ld. Assessing Officer is sustainable in the eyes of law and whether the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue, we need to examine the factual aspect of the said issue. We obseve that the assessee was showing the LPS charges calculated

M/S. NORTH EASTERN ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LTD.,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

27. So far as the remaining issues that whether the view taken by the ld. Assessing Officer is sustainable in the eyes of law and whether the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue, we need to examine the factual aspect of the said issue. We obseve that the assessee was showing the LPS charges calculated

MAYURPLY INDUSTRIES PVT LTD.,HOOGHLY, WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

In the result IT(SS)A Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

27-2-2004 and on that very date, the assessment order was passed. The learned CIT (Appeals) accepted that proper opportunity was not given. The assessee, therefore, placed further evidence before the learned CIT (Appeals) and on that, CIT (Appeals) asked for a remand report. The relevant portion of the remand report has been noted above. 12.1 As regards