THE PEERLESS GEN. FIN. & INV. CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 143(3) to point out that there is no discussion whatsoever made by the Assessing Officer in the said order on this issue. 15. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the short term capital gain arising from the sale of four flats being the depreciable

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

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

M/S. FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation and interest, the total income of the assessee from the business of dealing in lottery tickets was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.1,72,96,81,920/- for the year under consideration in the assessment completed under section 143(3

SARDA MINES PVT. LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-05(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 867/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd...............................………………………………………………Appellant 6Th Floor, Circular Court, 8, Ajc Bose Road, Kolkata – 700017. [Pan : Aahcs 2419 R] D.C.I.T., Cir 5(2) Kolkata………………………………………………......................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 69 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Gupta, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Md. Usman, Cit Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 14, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Principal Cit – 2, Kolkata Dated 28.03.2017 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: “1. For That The Order Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -2, Kolkata (In Short ‘Cit’) Dated 28.03.2017 Is Without Jurisdiction & Illegal As None Of The Condition Precedent For Exercise Of The Power Under Section 263 Of The Act Exists And/Or Has Been Satisfied & As Such The Said Order Is Erroneous & Without Jurisdiction & Liable To Be Cancelled. 2. For That The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Was Not In Any Way Erroneous Or Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & As Such The Cit Would Not Exercise Any Power Under Section 263 Of The Act. The Cit Erred In Holding That The Order Of Assessment Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

section 143(3) and the said assessment was subsequently reopened only in respect of three items, viz. (1) the expenses claimed for share issue; (2) bad and doubtful debts; and (3) excess depreciation

DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while the appeal of revenue is treated as dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 1532/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2003-04 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………….Appellant Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Acit, Circle 8 Kolkata,...................…………………………………………………….Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 167/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 11(1) Kolkata.............................………………………………………..Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………Respondent Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Appearances By: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

section 143(3) vide an order dated 13.02.2006, the total income of the assessee was determined by the A.O. at nil after allowing set off of unabsorbed depreciation

HALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while the appeal of revenue is treated as dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 1532/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2003-04 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………….Appellant Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Acit, Circle 8 Kolkata,...................…………………………………………………….Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 167/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 11(1) Kolkata.............................………………………………………..Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………Respondent Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Appearances By: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

section 143(3) vide an order dated 13.02.2006, the total income of the assessee was determined by the A.O. at nil after allowing set off of unabsorbed depreciation

DIPAK KUMAR DASBHOWMIK,PASCHIM MIDNAPORE vs. I.T.O., WARD - 38(1), MIDNAPORE , PASCHIM MIDNAPORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

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

ITO,WARD-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SREI CAPITAL MARKETS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

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

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S VATICAN COMMERCIAL LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

3) will not render the Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings even when intimation under section 143(1)(a) had been issued - CIT v.Raiesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P)Ltd., [2007J 161 Taxman 316 (SC). The appellant's case is covered by condition No.2. The re-assessment proceedings have been initiated after the expiry of four years. There

ACIT, CIRCLE - 13(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PADMA LOGISTICS & KHANIJ PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

depreciation amounting to Rs.20,61,04,026/- of the demerged company. 3. Facts of the case are that the assessee company filed the original return of income on 28-09-2010 showing total income of Rs.8,67,51,460/-. On l3-09-2010 and 06-10-2010, the assessee company and M/s. Star Ya Kalakaar.com Limited (hereinafter referred

DEEPAK BAJAJ ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 40(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

depreciation. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issues as have been raised by the Ld. PCIT in the show cause notice issued u/s 263 of the Act and finally as mentioned in the revisionary order were not the subject matter of the reassessment proceedings which culminated in framing of assessment u/s 143(3) read with

EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

143(3) read with section 144C(3) on the said points as erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue as per Explanation 2(c) below section 263(1) of the Act and setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer on the said points, he directed the Assessing Officer to make the assessment afresh after providing

D.C.I.T CIR - 2,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL FISHERIES CORPORATION LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

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

section 143(3)/147, the income of the assessee was determined by him at Rs.3,70,35,472/- after making disallowance on account of depreciation

I.T.O WD - 1(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORCHID GRIHA NIRMAN, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 2269/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 I.T.O., Ward-1(4) -Vs.- M/S. Orchid Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaco 7148 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Angam Shaiza, Cit For The Respondent : (I) Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Advocate (Ii)Shri S.Jhajharia, Fca (Iii) Shri Sujoy Sen, Advocate

143(3), it cannot be said that the AO formed an opinion which he sought to change. The only question is as to whether the AO formed any belief that any income in respect of which the assessee was chargeable to tax had escaped assessment enabling him to initiate reassessment proceedings. To decide upon this issue reasons recorded for reopening

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

3 to section 147 which is\nreproduced as under. For the purpose of assessment or reassessment under this section, the\nAssessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has\nescaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the\nproceedings under this section, notwithstanding that the reasons for such

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION CO. LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

depreciation amounting to Rs.19,26,87,056/-. 3. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3

NEW TEA CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT -2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

143(3) should not be revised under section 263 by holding the same to be erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 3. In reply to the notice issued by the Ld. CIT under section 263, written submissions were filed by the assessee vide letter dated 07.03.2016 and 09.03.2016. The Ld. CIT(A) however

ACIT, CIR-40, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SUNDARLAL MOHANLAL SARDA & OTHERS, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :007-08

section 143(1) of the Act and no scrutiny assessment is undertaken, it would be a case of formation of no option and, hence, in such cases assessment order itself records that issue was raised and is decided in favour of assessee; reassessment proceedings in said cases will be hit by principle of ‘change of opinion’. In Raymond Woollen Mills