PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment: year)……… " Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of Section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment: year)……… " Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of Section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

M/S VINAYAK FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

reopen an assessment, only if the conditions prescribed therein are satisfied,\nwhich may be listed as under.\n(1)\nThe condition, as per clear language of sec147 of the Act is that the Assessing\nOfficer has 'reason to believe' that any income chargeable to tax has escaped\nassessment for any assessment year. The formation of belief

WEST BENGAL ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

depreciation allowance or any other allowance,\nas the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this\nsection and in Sections 148 9 to 153 referred to as the relevant\n assessment year):\" (emphasis supplied)\n5. On going through the changes, quoted above, made to Section 147 of the Act,\nwe find that, prior to the Direct

WEST BENGAL ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

depreciation allowance or any other allowance,\nas the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this\nsection and in Sections 148 9 to 153 referred to as the relevant\n assessment year):\" (emphasis supplied)\n5.\nOn going through the changes, quoted above, made to Section 147 of the Act,\nwe find that, prior to the Direct

ITO, KOLKATA vs. AJIT KUMAR MINDA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and cross objections of the\nassessee are dismissed

reopening of assessment\nThe Assessing Officer after having resisted the audit wing report/point,\nstating that there is no material much less tangible material for\nreassessment and secondly that the claim of depreciation

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

reopening of the assessment\nu/s. 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act on the ground that the approval granted u/s. 151 is not a proper\napproval, copy whereof is available at pages 13 and 14 of the paper book filed on 13.02.2025.\nWe note that the Ld. JCIT in para 12 has just put his signature to a pre-printed satisfaction

ARISTOCRAT RESIDENCES LLP ,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 34 (1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Income Tax Officer, Ward Aristocrat Residences Llp 34(1) 2 Oswal Chambers Church Lane Aaykar Bhavan, Bbd Bagh, Kolkata-700001 Vs. Kolkata-700107 West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aavfa9997R Assessee By : Dr. Kapil Goel, Ar Revenue By : H. Robindro Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2025

reopen the assessment, on the ground that the assessee had not explained such loan receipttransactions. Such opinion was formed by the Assessing Officer on the basis that M/s. Green Valley Gems Pvt. Ltd. was a shell/paper company. It is on such premise that the Assessing Officer was of the view that income had escaped assessment within the purview of Clause

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,DELHI vs. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

reopening of the assessment\n12\nITA Nos. 2257, 2303, 2315 & 2316/Kol/2024 &\nITA Nos. 2399, 2400 & 2401/Kol/2024\nRungta Irrigation Ltd.\nu/s. 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act on the ground that the approval granted u/s. 151 is not a proper\napproval, copy whereof is available at pages 13 and 14 of the paper book filed on 13.02.2025.\nWe note that

RAGHUVIR RETAILERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Pcit-2 Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan P-7, Mandawa Shikhar, 151, Sarat Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Bose Road, Kolkata-700026, Vs. 700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaecr8231M Assessee By : Shri S.M. Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.02.2024

reopening proceedings were initiated were factually incorrect and requested for the dropping of the same. Therefore, the ld. AO only after considering the reply of the assessee accepted the same and it is presumed that the ld. AO has examined and applied his mind on the reply and documents furnished before him by the assessee. The case of the assessee

SURESH KUMAR PODDAR,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 63(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

reopen the assessment, on the ground that the as- sessee had not explained such loan receipttransactions. Such opinion was formed by the Assessing Officer on the basis that M/s. Green Val- ley Gems Pvt. Ltd. was a shell/paper company. It is on such premise that the Assessing Officer was of the view that income had escaped assessment within the purview

R D TEA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1555/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 R D Tea Limited……………………..……………………………..………….……Appellant Dhandhania House, 2Nd Floor, 4, Middleton Street, Kolkata – 700071. [Pan: Aabcr3010M] Vs. Acit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata…..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 22, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.06.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Company Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13 On 30.09.2012 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.67,34,990/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Assessed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 19.03.2015 By Assessing Total Income Of Rs.86,23,780/- Which Was Subsequently Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act On 27.04.2015 By Assessing Total Income Of Rs.83,90,960/-. Thereafter, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 Of The Act On 27.03.2019 After Obtaining Approval From The Competent Authority. In Response To Such Notice, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Again Declaring The Same Income As Earlier I.E. Rs.67,34,990/-. During The

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the concerned assessment year. However, where an assessment under Sub-section (3) of Section 143 has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action can be taken under Section 147 after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income

RAJATGIRI OIL INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the I. T. Act. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the C.I.T.(A) erred in disallowing depreciation

RAJATGIRI OIL INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the I. T. Act. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the C.I.T.(A) erred in disallowing depreciation

RAJATGIRI OIL INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the I. T. Act. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the C.I.T.(A) erred in disallowing depreciation

RAJATGIRI OIL INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the I. T. Act. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the C.I.T.(A) erred in disallowing depreciation

KIPPY ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reopening made based upon that said approval is bad in law.\n6. The Id. DR on the other hand submitted that this is a system of the\ndepartment involving the administrative hierarchy where the files are\nmoved for the approval with all details, notings and explanation. The\nId. DR argued that it is only after going through the same

NORBEN TEA & EXPORTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra]

reopening and addition being made entirely on different in the recorded reason were not pressed. Therefore, Ground nos. 1 (a) and (b) are dismissed as not pressed. 6. Ground no.2(a) is relating to the confirmation of addition of Rs. 13,30,802/- made by the AO towards prior period payment of employees’ contribution

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: 30th day of September 2007.

reopening the assessment, review would take palace. 4.3.4 Further, there is equal merit is the submission of the appellant, when it states that the AO has wrongly assumed the jurisdiction for reassessment u/s 147 after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year, in a case where assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act has already