DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. RASHMI CEMENT LTD., , KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.1606/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. Rashmi Cement Ltd. Kolkata 39, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr 4343 R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Radhey Shyam, Cit-Dr Respondent By : Shri A. K. Tulsiyan, Fca सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(A)-20, Kolkata Dated 13.04.2017 Passed In Case No.1119/Cc2(2)/Cit(A)/15-16 Reversing Assessing Officer’S Action Imposing Penalty Of Rs.3,09,69,700/- In His Order Dated 30.09.2015 U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. We Notice At The Time Of Hearing That This Revenue’S Appeal Suffers From Four Days Delay In Filing. It Filed Condonation Petition 06.07.2017 Describing Reasons Thereof To Various Procedural Formalities At Departmental Level. Learned Counsel Representing Assessee Is Very Fair In Not Disputing The Said Solemn Averments. We Therefore Condone The Impugned Four Days Delay In Filing Of Revenue’S Instant Appeal As Neither Intentional Nor Deliberate.

condone the impugned four days delay in filing of Revenue’s instant appeal as neither intentional nor deliberate. I.T.A Nos.1606/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Rashmi Cement Ltd. 3. We proceed further to notice that the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion deleting the impugned penalty reads as follows: “6. I have considered the findings given by the A.O in the penalty

POONAM MOHTA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, C.C-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Bench raising the following grounds of appeal: “1) That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Id CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in imposition of penalty amounting

ZYDUS HEALTHCARE LTD,GANGTOK vs. ACIT, CIR. 3(2), GANGTOK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 139/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healhcare Limited,……..................Appellant (Successor To Zydus Healthcare Sikkim), 4Th Floor, ‘D’ Wing, Zudus Corporate Park, Scheme No. 63, Survey No. 536, Khoraj (Gandhinagar), Nr. Vaishnodevi Circle, Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar, Gujrat-382481 [Pan: Aaacg1895Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim-737101 Appearances By: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, Ca & Sonal Pandey, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 20, 2023 O R D E R

274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act dated 30.12.2019. It is a notice inviting the explanation of the assessee as to why penalty be not imposed upon it. Copy of this notice is available on page no. 57 of the record. The ld. Counsel for the assesee further submitted that this issue has come

KARMICK SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(4),KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay in filing the appeal. 8. On merit, the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. Assessing Officer has erred in visiting the assessee with penalty amounting to Rs.6,63,154/- under section 271(1)(c). 9. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company has filed its return of income on 07.09.2011 electronically declaring

ITO, WARD-29(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AUTO CARE, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1484/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Ito, Ward-29(3), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Auto Care Centre [Pan: Aahfa 8997 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for adjudication. 2 M/s Auto Care Centre A.Yr.2008-09 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271E of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The brief

MRS ANASUYA RAMANA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-22(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

condone the said delay and proceed to dispose of this appeal of the assessee on merit. I.T.A. No. 962/KOL./2016 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 2 of 7 3. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. The ld. counsel for the assessee before me has raised a preliminary issue

SUPER REGRACTORIES,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O, WARD-1(4), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

condone the delay on merit and the appeal is admitted. I.T.A. No. 2229/KOL./2013 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 2 of 8 3. The assessee in the present case is a Company, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing of Bricks. The assessee-company filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 30.10.2006 declaring a loss

ANISHA ESTATE & FINANCE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Delay condoned. We do not find any merit in this petition. The special leave petition is , accordingly dismissed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. 9. Respectfully following the aforesaid judicial precedents, we cancel the penalty levied of Rs. 70,69,920/- by the AO U/Sec.271(1)(c) of the Act and confirmed by the CIT-A. Accordingly, the grounds

MANOJ KUMAR CHOWDHURY ,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD - 61(4) , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Manoj Kumar Chowdhury Vs. Ito, Ward-61(4), Kolkata

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

SHYAM SUNDAR HAZRA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 33(4) , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Shyam Sundar Hazra Vs. Ito, Ward-33(4), Kolkata

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

SHREE BALAJI PLYWOOD,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 48(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Shree Balaji Plywood Vs. Ito, Ward-48(4), Kolkata

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

NATHMAL SARAF CHARITY TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 1(1)(EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Nathmal Saraf Charity Trust Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1)(Exemption), Kolkata

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

BINAGURI TEA CO. PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Binaguri Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

DCIT, CIRCLE-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TANTIA CONSTRUCTION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

condone the said delay and proceed to dispose of these appeals of the Revenue on merit. I.T.A. Nos. 1753 to 1757/KOL./2014 Assessment years: 2004-2005 to 2008-2009 Page 5 of 11 6. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. The ld. counsel for the assessee before

MONISH RANJAN DASGUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 61(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the direction of CIT(A)-NFAC to restrict the levy of penalty to 100% of tax sought to be evaded

ABHIJIT GHOSH DASTIDAR,KOLKATA vs. THE ITO, WD-13(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for the A

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

SUJJAL KUMAR SAHA ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 22(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, these three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

M/S. AKASH ENTERPRISES,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 46(1) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am M/S Akash Enterprise Vs. Ito, Ward-46(1), Kolkata

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

KAKOLI CHATTERJEE,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 46(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & Sh. A.L.Sainikakoli Chatterjee, Ito, Vs Domjur, Howrah-711405. Ward-46(3), Pan-Adnpc5051D Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Pinki Shaw, Aca Respondent By Shankar Halder, Sr.Dr Jcit Date Of Hearing 26.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 29.03.2019

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against