SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

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

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total, income of such other person for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub-section

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

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

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total, income of such other person for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub-section

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

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

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total, income of such other person for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub-section

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

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

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total, income of such other person for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub-section

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

145 of the Income Tax Act provides the method of accounting required to be adopted by an Assessing Officer. Sub-clause (3) of this section would contemplate if the ld. Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the correctness or completeness of the accounts of the assessee, then he may reject the method of accounting or books of account, only thereafter

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

145 of the Income Tax Act provides the method of accounting required to be adopted by an Assessing Officer. Sub-clause (3) of this section would contemplate if the ld. Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the correctness or completeness of the accounts of the assessee, then he may reject the method of accounting or books of account, only thereafter

AMIT KUMAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), GUWAHATI, INCOME TAS OFFICER

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 145(3) of the Act, the AO could not have made any trading additions. The Ld. AR relied on a plethora of case laws to argue that at best a profit could be worked out after applying a commission rate of 0.15% only. 6. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below and stated that

AMIT KUMAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), GUWAHATI, INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 145(3) of the Act, the AO could not have made any trading additions. The Ld. AR relied on a plethora of case laws to argue that at best a profit could be worked out after applying a commission rate of 0.15% only. 6. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below and stated that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI vs. FORTUNE VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result both the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objections of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble V.P (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

reassessment order passed u/s 147/143(3) dated 24-12-2018, the AO’s predecessor had recorded a categorical finding that the receipts pertained to sale of investments which had been verified by him. There was no finding recorded by the AO’s predecessor that the investments sold by the assessee during the relevant year were bogus or fictitious. Having regard