BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

53 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 254(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai666Delhi300Surat129Karnataka99Jaipur97Chandigarh57Cochin57Kolkata53Bangalore50Ahmedabad45Calcutta36Pune31Chennai26Indore16Raipur16Hyderabad12Nagpur12Rajkot12Lucknow9Varanasi6Amritsar5Cuttack4Panaji3SC3Jabalpur2Agra2Patna2Visakhapatnam1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Guwahati1Jodhpur1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)47Addition to Income46Section 14735Disallowance31Section 14819Section 6818Section 143(2)16Section 14416Bogus Purchases11

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1166/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

Section 14A of the Act. We observe that though the above decision has been rendered in the context of disallowance of interest attributable to funds invested towards tax free income but the same analogy is applicable for considering the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore we are inclined to hold that 17 I.T.A. Nos.1068 & 1166/Kol/2017

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 53 · Page 1 of 3

Section 25010
Section 14A10
Unexplained Cash Credit10
ITA 1068/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed
ITAT Kolkata
10 May 2024
AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

Section 14A of the Act. We observe that though the above decision has been rendered in the context of disallowance of interest attributable to funds invested towards tax free income but the same analogy is applicable for considering the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore we are inclined to hold that 17 I.T.A. Nos.1068 & 1166/Kol/2017

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1222/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

Section 14A of the Act. We observe that though the above decision has been rendered in the context of disallowance of interest attributable to funds invested towards tax free income but the same analogy is applicable for considering the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore we are inclined to hold that 17 I.T.A. Nos.1068 & 1166/Kol/2017

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1223/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

Section 14A of the Act. We observe that though the above decision has been rendered in the context of disallowance of interest attributable to funds invested towards tax free income but the same analogy is applicable for considering the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore we are inclined to hold that 17 I.T.A. Nos.1068 & 1166/Kol/2017

ACIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1765/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

section 80-IA(13) does not apply. Explanation to section 80- IA(13) merely distinguishes between a developer and works contractor. It clarifies that a works contractor shall not be included in the category of 'developer' u/s 80-1A. Thus, the Explanation clearly does not apply to O&M projects. Hence, deduction of Rs. 35,16,9411- claimed

M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1572/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

section 80-IA(13) does not apply. Explanation to section 80- IA(13) merely distinguishes between a developer and works contractor. It clarifies that a works contractor shall not be included in the category of 'developer' u/s 80-1A. Thus, the Explanation clearly does not apply to O&M projects. Hence, deduction of Rs. 35,16,9411- claimed

ACIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1764/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

section 80-IA(13) does not apply. Explanation to section 80- IA(13) merely distinguishes between a developer and works contractor. It clarifies that a works contractor shall not be included in the category of 'developer' u/s 80-1A. Thus, the Explanation clearly does not apply to O&M projects. Hence, deduction of Rs. 35,16,9411- claimed

M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

ITA 1573/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80

section 80-IA(13) does not apply. Explanation to section 80- IA(13) merely distinguishes between a developer and works contractor. It clarifies that a works contractor shall not be included in the category of 'developer' u/s 80-1A. Thus, the Explanation clearly does not apply to O&M projects. Hence, deduction of Rs. 35,16,9411- claimed

DCIT, CIRCLE - 48, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SANJAY JAISWAL, HOWRAH

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is allowed , appeals of the assessee and revenue are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1649/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gopal Ram Sharma, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Debasish Lahiri, JCIT, ld. Sr.DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(3)Section 254

254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). ITA Nos.1649/K/2010, CO No. 162/K/2010 1 & ITA No. 1676/K/2010 Sanjay Jaiswal-A-AM 2. At the outset, the cross objection of the assessee is taken as it raises the preliminary objection that the assessment framed is barred by limitation. We find that the cross objection preferred

ABC ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 156/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.153 & 154/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.155 & 156/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Revenue/Department By : Shri A. K. Nayak, Cit Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: The Revenue & Assessee Have Filed Their Instant Cross-Appeals For Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 01.12.2017 Passed In Case No.10147/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 & No.10919/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 Restricting The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing The Entire Purchases Of Rs.4,90,30,444/-

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)

1) TMI 88- BOMBAY HIGH COURT), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has specifically held that in a case where sales are considered genuine, no addition, on account of bogus purchases, can be made. Furthermore, the rejection of such purchases will bring the G.P. of the assessee astronomically high which is impossible to earn in this line of trade

ABC ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 155/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.153 & 154/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.155 & 156/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Revenue/Department By : Shri A. K. Nayak, Cit Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: The Revenue & Assessee Have Filed Their Instant Cross-Appeals For Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 01.12.2017 Passed In Case No.10147/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 & No.10919/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 Restricting The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing The Entire Purchases Of Rs.4,90,30,444/-

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)

1) TMI 88- BOMBAY HIGH COURT), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has specifically held that in a case where sales are considered genuine, no addition, on account of bogus purchases, can be made. Furthermore, the rejection of such purchases will bring the G.P. of the assessee astronomically high which is impossible to earn in this line of trade

ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. ABC ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 153/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.153 & 154/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.155 & 156/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Revenue/Department By : Shri A. K. Nayak, Cit Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: The Revenue & Assessee Have Filed Their Instant Cross-Appeals For Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 01.12.2017 Passed In Case No.10147/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 & No.10919/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 Restricting The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing The Entire Purchases Of Rs.4,90,30,444/-

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)

1) TMI 88- BOMBAY HIGH COURT), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has specifically held that in a case where sales are considered genuine, no addition, on account of bogus purchases, can be made. Furthermore, the rejection of such purchases will bring the G.P. of the assessee astronomically high which is impossible to earn in this line of trade

ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. ABC ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 154/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.153 & 154/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.155 & 156/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Abc Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Room No.44, 10Th Floor, Fortuna Tower, 23A, Netaji Subhas Road, (Opp. Coal Bhawan), Kol-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca7561P (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Revenue/Department By : Shri A. K. Nayak, Cit Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: The Revenue & Assessee Have Filed Their Instant Cross-Appeals For Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2014-15 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 2, Kolkata’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 01.12.2017 Passed In Case No.10147/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 & No.10919/Cit(A)-2/2016-17 Restricting The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing The Entire Purchases Of Rs.4,90,30,444/-

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)

1) TMI 88- BOMBAY HIGH COURT), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has specifically held that in a case where sales are considered genuine, no addition, on account of bogus purchases, can be made. Furthermore, the rejection of such purchases will bring the G.P. of the assessee astronomically high which is impossible to earn in this line of trade

SRI TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O.,WARD-2(3), BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2625/KOL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 40A(3)

254 ITR 434 (SC) the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: "In order to apply section 41(1) in the context of the facts of the present case, the following points are to be kept in view (1) in the course of the assessment for an earlier year, allowance or deduction has been made in respect of trading liability

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

ITA 2043/KOL/2017[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Saumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

254 ITR 434 (SC) the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: "In order to apply section 41(1) in the context of the facts of the present case, the following points are to be kept in view (1) in the course of the assessment for an earlier year, allowance or deduction has been made in respect of trading liability

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

ITA 2046/KOL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Saumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

254 ITR 434 (SC) the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: "In order to apply section 41(1) in the context of the facts of the present case, the following points are to be kept in view (1) in the course of the assessment for an earlier year, allowance or deduction has been made in respect of trading liability

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

ITA 2045/KOL/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Saumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

254 ITR 434 (SC) the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: "In order to apply section 41(1) in the context of the facts of the present case, the following points are to be kept in view (1) in the course of the assessment for an earlier year, allowance or deduction has been made in respect of trading liability

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

ITA 2044/KOL/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Saumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

254 ITR 434 (SC) the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: "In order to apply section 41(1) in the context of the facts of the present case, the following points are to be kept in view (1) in the course of the assessment for an earlier year, allowance or deduction has been made in respect of trading liability

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

ITA 2047/KOL/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Saumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

254 ITR 434 (SC) the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: "In order to apply section 41(1) in the context of the facts of the present case, the following points are to be kept in view (1) in the course of the assessment for an earlier year, allowance or deduction has been made in respect of trading liability

I.T.O WD - 1(2),HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY vs. SRI KALIN DUTTA, HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal by Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1055/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2008-09

Section 143(3)

section 133(6) of the Act. However, notices to some of the parties were returned back with the remarks hereunder: Sl Name Amount involved Gist of the remarks No. of postman 1 M/s Ma Tara Enterprise Rs.9,87,036/- (purchase) Insufficient address 3 M/s Kali Enterprise Rs.2,53,949/- (purchase) Not known 4 Sri Chandi Samanta Rs.67,048/- (purchase