AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

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

234 A/B/C the same was unjustified and hence the same be recalculated as per the applicable law. Assessment Years: 2012-2013, 2015-16, 2012-13 Agrim Infraproject Private Limited (12) The appellant craves leave to produce additional evidences in terms of Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules 1963. (13) The appellant craves leave to press new, additional

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA , AGARTALA vs. SHRI SUBHAJIT PAUL, AGARTALA

In the result, cross-objection nos

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.116/Gau/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15)

reassessment – (a) In respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years [and for the relevant assessment year or years] referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153A, within a period of twenty-one months from the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR vs. SHRI SANWARMALL AGARWALLA, DIMAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

reassessment proceedings after more than four years was clearly barred by time. There is yet another aspect of the matter. The reason so recorded by the Assessing Officer is, that the petitioner has indicated the computation of long term capital gains tax liability, whereas the petitioner was liable to pay short term capital gains tax since the petitioner had sold

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR vs. SHRI ANKIT AGARWALLA, DIMAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

reassessment proceedings after more than four years was clearly barred by time. There is yet another aspect of the matter. The reason so recorded by the Assessing Officer is, that the petitioner has indicated the computation of long term capital gains tax liability, whereas the petitioner was liable to pay short term capital gains tax since the petitioner had sold

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR vs. M/S. PARSURAM SANWARMAL AGARWALLA & SONS, DIMAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

reassessment proceedings after more than four years was clearly barred by time. There is yet another aspect of the matter. The reason so recorded by the Assessing Officer is, that the petitioner has indicated the computation of long term capital gains tax liability, whereas the petitioner was liable to pay short term capital gains tax since the petitioner had sold

INCOME TAX OFFICERM WARD-DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR vs. SHRI BHAMA AGARWALLA, DIMAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

reassessment proceedings after more than four years was clearly barred by time. There is yet another aspect of the matter. The reason so recorded by the Assessing Officer is, that the petitioner has indicated the computation of long term capital gains tax liability, whereas the petitioner was liable to pay short term capital gains tax since the petitioner had sold

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)

reassessment proceedings was to be upheld - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of revenue]” In the case of Reena Jain reported in 174 taxmann.com 849 (Calcutta). The head notes read as under: “Where Assessing Officer reopened assessment on ground that assessee had received accommodation entry of bogus LTCG from penny stock, since Assessing Officer had taken note of ITBA data

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)

reassessment proceedings was to be upheld - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of revenue]” In the case of Reena Jain reported in 174 taxmann.com 849 (Calcutta). The head notes read as under: “Where Assessing Officer reopened assessment on ground that assessee had received accommodation entry of bogus LTCG from penny stock, since Assessing Officer had taken note of ITBA data

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 153A of the Act for the AY 2017-18, AY 2018-19 and AY 2019-20, shall be treated as the Returns of Income filed u/s 139(1). (ii) That, the Audit Reports in Form-10CCB [as referred u/s Section 80-IA(7) of the Act] which were furnished by the Assessee within the time limit as given

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 153A of the Act for the AY 2017-18, AY 2018-19 and AY 2019-20, shall be treated as the Returns of Income filed u/s 139(1). (ii) That, the Audit Reports in Form-10CCB [as referred u/s Section 80-IA(7) of the Act] which were furnished by the Assessee within the time limit as given

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 153A of the Act for the AY 2017-18, AY 2018-19 and AY 2019-20, shall be treated as the Returns of Income filed u/s 139(1). (ii) That, the Audit Reports in Form-10CCB [as referred u/s Section 80-IA(7) of the Act] which were furnished by the Assessee within the time limit as given

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 153A of the Act for the AY 2017-18, AY 2018-19 and AY 2019-20, shall be treated as the Returns of Income filed u/s 139(1). (ii) That, the Audit Reports in Form-10CCB [as referred u/s Section 80-IA(7) of the Act] which were furnished by the Assessee within the time limit as given

ASSISTANT 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 153A of the Act for the AY 2017-18, AY 2018-19 and AY 2019-20, shall be treated as the Returns of Income filed u/s 139(1). (ii) That, the Audit Reports in Form-10CCB [as referred u/s Section 80-IA(7) of the Act] which were furnished by the Assessee within the time limit as given