PAIRAGACHA COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,PAIRAGACHA vs. ITO, HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 80P of the Act also if the return of income are not filed before the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Had it been a case of scrutiny proceeding u/s. 143(3) of the Act, the situation certainly would have been against the assessee subject to the approval by the authorities for condonation of delay

PAIRAGACHA COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,PAIRAGACHA vs. ITO, HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 80P of the Act also if the return of income are not filed before the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Had it been a case of scrutiny proceeding u/s. 143(3) of the Act, the situation certainly would have been against the assessee subject to the approval by the authorities for condonation of delay

BINOD KUMAR MAHATO ,BURDWAN vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - BURDWAN , BURDWAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

271A of the Act. He further records in his order that the assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act. assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act. 2.1. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. CIT(A), Burdwan, vide Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. CIT(A), Burdwan, vide Aggrieved, the assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. G. D. CONSTRUCTION & CO., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11

disallowed the labour charges on ad hoc basis @ 10%. However, Ld. CIT(A) reversed the order of AO by deleting the same. Now the issue before us arises whether the relief granted by Ld. CIT-A in the above facts and circumstances is justified. 6.1 The AO has framed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act which is contrary

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

disallowance. 14. The next issue raised in Ground No.7 is against the action of the ld CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.19,25,000/- as made by the Assessing Officer u/s.68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. 15. Facts in brief are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

disallowance. 14. The next issue raised in Ground No.7 is against the action of the ld CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.19,25,000/- as made by the Assessing Officer u/s.68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. 15. Facts in brief are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

disallowance. 14. The next issue raised in Ground No.7 is against the action of the ld CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.19,25,000/- as made by the Assessing Officer u/s.68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. 15. Facts in brief are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

disallowance. 14. The next issue raised in Ground No.7 is against the action of the ld CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.19,25,000/- as made by the Assessing Officer u/s.68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. 15. Facts in brief are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee