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.

31 results for “disallowance”+ Section 11Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai62Delhi45Kolkata31Ahmedabad22Bangalore19Hyderabad14Chandigarh12Lucknow11Indore11Amritsar9SC8Chennai7Pune5Jaipur5Nagpur4Dehradun4Cuttack4Karnataka3Jodhpur3Calcutta2Jabalpur2Panaji2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Visakhapatnam2Telangana1Ranchi1Agra1Surat1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 80I36Disallowance28Section 143(3)25Deduction21Addition to Income18Section 8012Section 80H12Section 14712Section 1489Section 143(1)

LMJ INTERNATIONAL LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 230/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

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

Section 80I

disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80IA(4) in respect of profits derived from its warehouses. 4. As regards the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80IB(11A

ITO, WD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RAVLON PROPERTIES (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1458/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1458/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.O. Ward 1(3) Kolkata .............................…………………………......................Appellant Room No. 11A, 4Th Floor, Aayakr Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 M/S. Ravlon Properties (P) Ltd.……………………………………………….........Respondent 35, C.R. Avenue, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 12. [Pan: Aaccr3164P] Appearances By: Shri P.B. Pramanick, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri A.K. Tulsyan, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 28, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 06, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) – 1, Kolkata Dated 26.02.2014 On The Following Grounds: I. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit (A) Is Not Justified In Deleting Addition Of Rs. 1,91,90,538/- On Undisclosed Income Of The Assessee By Admitting Fresh Evidences From The Assessee In Contravention To Rule 46A Of The I.T. Rules & Without Giving A Finding As To What Prevented The Taxpayer To Adduce Evidences Before The Assessing Officer. Ii. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit (A) Is Not Justified In Deleting Disallowance Of Rs. 2,24,877/- U/S 14A Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Read With Rule 8D Without Considering The Fact That Nexus Between The Interest Earned & Debited To The Profit & Loss Account Could Not Be Established By The Assessee Before The Assessing Officer. Moreover, The Ld.

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

8
Section 248
Depreciation8
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80G

section 80G of the Act. The Ld. CIT (A) however deleted the said disallowance after having found that the donation made by the assessee to Kolkata Police Family Welfare Centre had immense advertisement value besides fulfilling the responsibility of social commitment. He held that the said donation therefore was eligible to be allowed as business expenditure. At the time

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INTRASTRACTURE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 285/KOL/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

11A) and (11B) of section 80IB of the Act the assessee’s hot mixing plant business is not entitled to deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who was pleased to allow the same by holding as under: M/s. ABCI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., AY 2003-04 & 2004-05 7. Aggrieved

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INFRASTRACTURE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 279/KOL/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

11A) and (11B) of section 80IB of the Act the assessee’s hot mixing plant business is not entitled to deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who was pleased to allow the same by holding as under: M/s. ABCI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., AY 2003-04 & 2004-05 7. Aggrieved

RAM KARAN TIWARI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-54, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee being ITA No

ITA 1783/KOL/2014[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

11A, Palm Avenue, Ashok Towers, Ballygunge, Kolkata-700 019 [PAN: ABTPT 8315 M] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,............................Respondent Circle-54, Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700 001 Appearances by: Shri Manoj Kumar Tiwari, C.A., for the assessee Shri A.K. Singh, JCIT, D.R., for the Department Date of concluding the hearing : August 10, 2016 Date of pronouncing

DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. LMJ LOGISTICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1800/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2007-08

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80BSection 80I

section 143(3), is not entitled to guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all which could well apply to the case of the appellant. The disallowance is therefore remains unsubstantiated and cannot be sustained.” The Revenue, being aggrieved, is in appeal before us on the following grounds:- “1.That on facts and circumstances

JAYSHREE TEA & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 27/KOL/2023[2020-2021]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 11(7)Section 11ASection 143(1)

Section 11(A) of the Provident Fund Act. Accordingly we restore the issue back to the file of AO with the direction to first compute the disallowance on account of provident fund/ESI by applying Rule 11A

I.T.O WD - 2(3),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S LAST PEAK DATA PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 154/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri Vasant SubramanyanFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 10BSection 115JSection 14

disallowing depreciation, fee paid for increase in share capital of Rs.7,21,02,983. 45. The plea of the Assessee before CIT(A) was that from the income eligible for deduction u/s.10AA of the Act there can be no set off of carried forward loss and deduction u/s.10AA of the Act has to be allowed on the said income only

ITO, WARD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GKW LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 432/KOL/2012[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :1998-99 Ito Ward-1(3), Room V/S. M/S Gkw Ltd., Central No. 1A, 4Th Floor, Plaza, 2/6 Sarat Bose Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Road, Office Space No. Chowringhee Suquare, 406, 4Thfloor, Kolkata-20 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No. Aabcg 0671 K] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145A

section 143(3) of the Act after making certain additions/ disallowances at NIL. 4. The first issue raised by Revenue in this appeal is that the learned CIT(A) erred in allowing the carried forward loss of Rs. 29,09,04,771/-. 4.1 The assessee, for the year under consideration has filed its return of income showing the losses

SITA SHAW,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-56(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 345/KOL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Aby T.Varkeyand Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

11A, Temple Street, -Vs- Kolkata Kolkata-700072 [PAN :ALJPS7005D] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant G. S. Pandey, AR For the Respondent Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT. Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11.01.2017 Date of Pronouncement 15.03.2017 ORDER Per Waseem Ahmed, AM 1. This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXVI, Kolkata, dated

SHREEGOPAL GOVIND SPONGE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 244/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.243&244/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd……..…...........................................……Appellant 11A, 6Th Floor, Room No.2, Maharshi Devendra Road, P.O. Kolkata-700007. [Pan: Aagcs2173M] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Kolkata.......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 29, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 10, 2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.12.2021 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’). Since Identical Facts & Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals Hence The Same Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.1384/Kol/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Is Taken As The Lead Case. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law As Well As In Facts Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 8,53,593/- U/S 36(Va) When No Such Deduction Was Claimed By The Appellant In The Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit (A) Is Unlawful In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. Ao In Disallowing A Sum Of Rs. 8,53,593/- By Making Adjustment In Intimation U/S 143(1)(A) To The Returned Income When The Conditions Indicated In Clause (A) Of Section 143(1) For Adjustments Do Not Exist;

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

11A, 6th Floor, Room No.2, Maharshi Devendra Road, P.O. Kolkata-700007. [PAN: AAGCS2173M] vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata.......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : September 29, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : October 10, 2022 आदेश / ORDER

SHREEGOPAL GOVIND SPONGE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 243/KOL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.243&244/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shreegopal Govind Sponge (P) Ltd……..…...........................................……Appellant 11A, 6Th Floor, Room No.2, Maharshi Devendra Road, P.O. Kolkata-700007. [Pan: Aagcs2173M] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Kolkata.......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 29, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 10, 2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.12.2021 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’). Since Identical Facts & Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals Hence The Same Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.1384/Kol/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Is Taken As The Lead Case. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law As Well As In Facts Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 8,53,593/- U/S 36(Va) When No Such Deduction Was Claimed By The Appellant In The Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit (A) Is Unlawful In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. Ao In Disallowing A Sum Of Rs. 8,53,593/- By Making Adjustment In Intimation U/S 143(1)(A) To The Returned Income When The Conditions Indicated In Clause (A) Of Section 143(1) For Adjustments Do Not Exist;

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

11A, 6th Floor, Room No.2, Maharshi Devendra Road, P.O. Kolkata-700007. [PAN: AAGCS2173M] vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata.......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : September 29, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : October 10, 2022 आदेश / ORDER

GRAPHITE INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, R-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 305/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

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

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

section 80IA of the Act. The AO also observed that the investment in the power divisions is 28.62% of the total funds including loans. Accordingly the AO allocated the total interest expenses in the above stated ratio i.e. 28.62% amounting to Rs. 2.44 crores only. On the similar analogy the AO also allocated other expenses as listed on page

DCIT, CIR-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GRAPHITE INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 559/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

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

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

section 80IA of the Act. The AO also observed that the investment in the power divisions is 28.62% of the total funds including loans. Accordingly the AO allocated the total interest expenses in the above stated ratio i.e. 28.62% amounting to Rs. 2.44 crores only. On the similar analogy the AO also allocated other expenses as listed on page

GRAPHITE INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, R-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 304/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

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

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

section 80IA of the Act. The AO also observed that the investment in the power divisions is 28.62% of the total funds including loans. Accordingly the AO allocated the total interest expenses in the above stated ratio i.e. 28.62% amounting to Rs. 2.44 crores only. On the similar analogy the AO also allocated other expenses as listed on page

ITO(EXEMPTION), WARD-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKTA vs. DEV SANGHA SEVA PRATISTHAN, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1254/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14 Income Tax Officer V/S. Dev Sangha Seva (Exemption), Ward-1(2), Pratisthan, 28/2A, Hare 10B, Middle Ton Row, Kesto Sett Lane, Kolkata-71 Kolkata-700 050 [Pan No.Aaaad 1567 C] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent S.M.S Taoheed, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shr K.M. Roy, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 05-06-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13-06-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-25. Kolkata’S Order Dated 17.03.2017 In Case No. Cit(A)-25 Kolkata/Fy 2016-17/ Dev Sangha Seva Pratishan, Ay 2013-14_143(3)_B-1B/432, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short, ‘The Act’. 2. The Revenue’S Former Substantive Ground Pleads That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Deleting Assessee’S Administrative & Establishment Expenses Disallowance Of ₹56,08,823/- As Application Of Its Case For Charitable Purpose U/S 11A Of The Act With The Following Detailed Discussions:- “5. Accumulation / Setting-Apart U/S. 11(1)(A): Issue Of ‘Administrative & Establishment Expenses’. [Ground Of Appeal No.1] ₹56,08,823/-

Section 11(1)(a)Section 11ASection 12ASection 143(3)

disallowance of ₹56,08,823/- as application of its case for charitable purpose u/s 11A of the Act with the following detailed discussions:- “5. Accumulation / setting-apart u/s. 11(1)(a): Issue of ‘administrative and establishment expenses’. [Ground of appeal No.1] ₹56,08,823/- ITA No.1254/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2013-14 ITO (Ex), Ward-1(2), Kol. Vs. Dev Sangha Seva Pratisthan

PATTON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 261/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Patton International Principal Commissioner Of Ltd., C/O Jain Vinod K & Income-Tax, Kolkata-1. Associates, 41A, A. J. C. Vs Bose Road, Diamond . Prestige Nirman, 6Th Floor, Suite No.613, Kolkata- 700017 (Pan: Aabcp7901M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amitava Bhattacharyya, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 197Section 263Section 40Section 80G

Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act in respect commission paid to the Managing Director/Directors of the assessee company for non- deduction of tax at source as well as non-compliance of section 197 of the Companies Act, 2013; (iii) In respect of double claim of depreciation on fixed assets of SEZ unit at Falta. 2.1. Brief facts

ACIT, CIRCLE-32, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MRS. ISHITA MOHATTA, KOLKATA

In the result the Cross Objection, No

ITA 788/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Acit, Cir-32, Kolkata Vs. Mrs. Ishita Mohatta 10B, Middleton Row, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 24, Park Street, Magma House, 9Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 071. 700 016. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajfpk 3943 P (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & Co No.45/Kol/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs. Acit, Cir-32, Kolkata Mrs. Ishita Mohatta 24, Park Street, Magma House, 9Th 10B, Middleton Row, 3Rd Floor, Floor, Kolkata – 700 016. Kolkata – 700 071. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajfpk 3943 P (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Mondal, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Jhajharia, AR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 54F

disallowed the exemption u/s 54F of the Act, on completely a different ground i.e. the assessee purchased a new asset which has been let out. According to A.O, no exemption u/s 54F can be allowed in respect of property let out. The assumptions and presumptions of the A.O is wholly wrong. The ld Counsel submitted that assessee owned a residential

SRI KAILASH PRASAD AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-22(2), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the captioned assessee(s) are dismissed

ITA 509/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

11A, Ekta Residency, 174A, Manicktala Main Road, Manicktala-700054, West Bengal [PAN:ACDPA1409Q] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.....................................................................Respondent Ward-22(2), Kolkata, 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, Kolkata-700016 Appearances by: N o n e, appeared on behalf of the assessee Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT(DR), appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing : 2nd August

RAJPAT PANDYA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-36(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the captioned assessee(s) are dismissed

ITA 1365/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

11A, Ekta Residency, 174A, Manicktala Main Road, Manicktala-700054, West Bengal [PAN:ACDPA1409Q] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.....................................................................Respondent Ward-22(2), Kolkata, 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, Kolkata-700016 Appearances by: N o n e, appeared on behalf of the assessee Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT(DR), appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing : 2nd August