DCIT,CENT CIR-I ,KOL, KOLKATA vs. DEEPAK CHOUDHURY, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri Balaganesh & Shri S.S Viswanethra Ravi

27,15,540 2,28,24,040 ITA Nos 1875- 1878/Kol/09-B-AM 2 Deepak Choudhury 4. In the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee disclosed further income of Rs. 25,00,000/- for the Asst Year 2005-06. The Learned AO levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act for the Asst Years

SRI NARENDRA N. THACKER,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, C.C.XXIV, KOLKATA

ITA Nos.1786-

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

27-11 -2015 Date of Pronouncement: 4 -12-2015 ORDER SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM : These appeals arise out of the common order passed by the Learned CIT(A) in Appeal Nos. 123 to 127/CC-XXIV/CIT(A)/C-III/08-09 for the Asst Years 2001-02 to 2005-06 dated 16.7.2009 and in Appeal Nos. 123 to 125/CC-XXIV/CIT(A)/C-III/08- 09 for the Asst Years

M/S. DHANSAR ENGINEERING (P) LTD.,DHANBAD vs. ACIT, C.C. - VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed

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

27(1) (c) no penalty is leviable if the return is filed u/s. 139(1) of the I.T Act including the additional income. In view of the provisions of Sec. 153A, old returns & proceeding relating to the year are abated and new proceeding started with reference to new return filed, which is a return filed under

M/S PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Pricewaterhouse Coopers Private Limited……...............................……………………......Appellant Block-Ep, Plot –Y14 Salt Lake City Sector-V Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan : Aabcp 9181 H] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata……..........................…....Appellant Appearances By: Shri Kanchun Kaushal, A/R & Shri Bikash Kr. Jain, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Vijay Shankar, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 25Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 29Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

penalty notice under section 274 read with section 271(1)(C) of the Act along with the draft assessment order section 274 read with section 271(1)(C) of the Act along with the draft assessment order section 274 read with section 271(1)(C) of the Act along with the draft assessment order dated 27 November 2015, which renders

GANAPATI INDUSTRIAL (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Raviganpati Industrial Pvt.Ltd., Vs Dcit, 2, Hare Street, 3Rd Floor, Circle-4(2), Nicco House, Kolkata-700001. Kolkata. Pan-Aaacg9441Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Vs Dcit, Jekay International Pvt.Ltd., 2, Hare Street, 3Rd Floor, Circle-4(2), Nicco House, Kolkata-700001. Kolkata. Pan-Aabcj6307K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri.M.Satnaliwala, Fca Respondent By Shri.Anand Kumar Kedia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 28.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 15.02.2019 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

10% of undisclosed income of the specified period or previous years. In the case where the assessee in the course of search in a statement (under Section 4 of Section 132) admits the undisclosed income and specified manner in which such income has been derived, than the provisions of Section 271AAB automatically attracts and the proceedings are to be carried

JEKAY INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Raviganpati Industrial Pvt.Ltd., Vs Dcit, 2, Hare Street, 3Rd Floor, Circle-4(2), Nicco House, Kolkata-700001. Kolkata. Pan-Aaacg9441Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Vs Dcit, Jekay International Pvt.Ltd., 2, Hare Street, 3Rd Floor, Circle-4(2), Nicco House, Kolkata-700001. Kolkata. Pan-Aabcj6307K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri.M.Satnaliwala, Fca Respondent By Shri.Anand Kumar Kedia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 28.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 15.02.2019 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

10% of undisclosed income of the specified period or previous years. In the case where the assessee in the course of search in a statement (under Section 4 of Section 132) admits the undisclosed income and specified manner in which such income has been derived, than the provisions of Section 271AAB automatically attracts and the proceedings are to be carried

DCIT, C.C. I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMARNATH SHROFF, KOLKATA

In the result ITA Nos.1797 to 1800/Kol/2009 are allowed while ITA Nos

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

penalty proceedings to explain the reasons as to why he had not admitted the entire incomes in each of the returns filed u/s 139(1) of the Act for A.Y.2001-02, 2002-03, 2004-05 and 2005-06. With regard to the immunity Explanation 5 to Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act, the CIT(A) was of the view that

AMAR NATH SHROFF,KOLKATA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA

In the result ITA Nos.1797 to 1800/Kol/2009 are allowed while ITA Nos

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

penalty proceedings to explain the reasons as to why he had not admitted the entire incomes in each of the returns filed u/s 139(1) of the Act for A.Y.2001-02, 2002-03, 2004-05 and 2005-06. With regard to the immunity Explanation 5 to Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act, the CIT(A) was of the view that

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SANJAY DHINGRA, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

10% of the undisclosed income of the 'specified previous year' where search is initiated after 01-06-2007 but before 01-07-2012. Sub-section (3) of section 271 AAA provides that in case penalty is imposed under sub-section (1), then the provisions of section 271(1)(c) shall not apply in respect of such undisclosed income. When

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. KAMALESH AGARWAL, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

10% of the undisclosed income of the 'specified previous year' where search is initiated after 01-06-2007 but before 01-07-2012. Sub-section (3) of section 271 AAA provides that in case penalty is imposed under sub-section (1), then the provisions of section 271(1)(c) shall not apply in respect of such undisclosed income. When

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. DILIP KUMAR MODI, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

10% of the undisclosed income of the 'specified previous year' where search is initiated after 01-06-2007 but before 01-07-2012. Sub-section (3) of section 271 AAA provides that in case penalty is imposed under sub-section (1), then the provisions of section 271(1)(c) shall not apply in respect of such undisclosed income. When

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. SHRI MURARILAL AGARWAL, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

10% of the undisclosed income of the 'specified previous year' where search is initiated after 01-06-2007 but before 01-07-2012. Sub-section (3) of section 271 AAA provides that in case penalty is imposed under sub-section (1), then the provisions of section 271(1)(c) shall not apply in respect of such undisclosed income. When

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SIDHANT GUPTA, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

10% of the undisclosed income of the 'specified previous year' where search is initiated after 01-06-2007 but before 01-07-2012. Sub-section (3) of section 271 AAA provides that in case penalty is imposed under sub-section (1), then the provisions of section 271(1)(c) shall not apply in respect of such undisclosed income. When

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VIKASH AGARWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. M.Balaganesh & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Raviacit, Vs Vishal Agarwal, Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 4Thfloor, 547, Block-N, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, New Alipore, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. Kolkata-700053. Pan-Adcpa9882F Acit, Vikashagarwal, Vs Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 547, Block-N, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, New Alipore, Kolkata- Shanti Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata- 700053. 700107. Pan-Adcpa9882F C.O.No.-106/Kol/2017 (In Ita No.1537/Kol/2017) (Assessment Year-2013-14) Vs Vishal Agarwal, Acit, 547, Block-N, Central Circle-2(3), Room New Alipore, No.403, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Kolkata-700053. Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pan-Adcpa9882F Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.-107/Kol/2017 (In Ita No.1540/Kol/2017) (Assessment Year-2013-14) Vs Acit, Vikash Agarwal, 547, Block-N, Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, New Alipore, Kolkata-700053. Pan-Adcpa9882F 110, Shanti Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. G.Hangshing, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. A.K.Tibrewal, Fca &Amit Agarwal, Adv.

271 is defective. In this regard as discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs that the assessee after receipt of the said notice contested by filing reply to the said show cause notice in the penalty proceedings. Further on perusal of the said notice, it is observed in the last paragraph that the AO directed the assessee to appear before

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VISHAL AGARWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. M.Balaganesh & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Raviacit, Vs Vishal Agarwal, Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 4Thfloor, 547, Block-N, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, New Alipore, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. Kolkata-700053. Pan-Adcpa9882F Acit, Vikashagarwal, Vs Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 547, Block-N, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, New Alipore, Kolkata- Shanti Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata- 700053. 700107. Pan-Adcpa9882F C.O.No.-106/Kol/2017 (In Ita No.1537/Kol/2017) (Assessment Year-2013-14) Vs Vishal Agarwal, Acit, 547, Block-N, Central Circle-2(3), Room New Alipore, No.403, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Kolkata-700053. Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pan-Adcpa9882F Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.-107/Kol/2017 (In Ita No.1540/Kol/2017) (Assessment Year-2013-14) Vs Acit, Vikash Agarwal, 547, Block-N, Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, New Alipore, Kolkata-700053. Pan-Adcpa9882F 110, Shanti Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. G.Hangshing, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. A.K.Tibrewal, Fca &Amit Agarwal, Adv.

271 is defective. In this regard as discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs that the assessee after receipt of the said notice contested by filing reply to the said show cause notice in the penalty proceedings. Further on perusal of the said notice, it is observed in the last paragraph that the AO directed the assessee to appear before

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHAILAJA PARK PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. M.Balaganesh & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Raviacit, Vs Vishal Agarwal, Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 4Thfloor, 547, Block-N, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, New Alipore, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. Kolkata-700053. Pan-Adcpa9882F Acit, Vikashagarwal, Vs Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 547, Block-N, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, New Alipore, Kolkata- Shanti Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata- 700053. 700107. Pan-Adcpa9882F C.O.No.-106/Kol/2017 (In Ita No.1537/Kol/2017) (Assessment Year-2013-14) Vs Vishal Agarwal, Acit, 547, Block-N, Central Circle-2(3), Room New Alipore, No.403, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Kolkata-700053. Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pan-Adcpa9882F Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.-107/Kol/2017 (In Ita No.1540/Kol/2017) (Assessment Year-2013-14) Vs Acit, Vikash Agarwal, 547, Block-N, Central Circle-2(3), Room No.403, 4Thfloor, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, New Alipore, Kolkata-700053. Pan-Adcpa9882F 110, Shanti Pally, E.M.Bye Pass, Kolkata-700107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. G.Hangshing, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. A.K.Tibrewal, Fca &Amit Agarwal, Adv.

271 is defective. In this regard as discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs that the assessee after receipt of the said notice contested by filing reply to the said show cause notice in the penalty proceedings. Further on perusal of the said notice, it is observed in the last paragraph that the AO directed the assessee to appear before

DCIT, C.CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI BRIJENDRA KUMAR PODDAR, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed, while the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

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

10,731/- were made by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee for assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively on account of undisclosed investment in HSBC, Switzerland. He also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for both the years under consideration. 4. In response to the show-cause notices issued

SRI SURYA PRAKASH BAGLA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR-VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 398/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Surya Prakash Bagla -Vs- Dcit, Central Circle-Vii, Kolkata [Pan: Aebpb 4558 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act. In this regard, the reliance placed by the ld AR on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Durga Kamal Rice Mills vs CIT reported in (2004) 265 ITR 25 (Cal) is very well founded. It was held in that case as under:- 2. Mr. J.P. Khaitan

AMITABHA SANYAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-58(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the penalty levied is hereby deleted

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2011-12 Amitabha Sanyal, Income Tax Officer, 108B, Block-F, New Alipore, Ward – 58(4), Kolkata, Kolkata – 700053 Vs Aayakar Bhawan, (Pan: Aleps2352J) Bamboo Villa, 169, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata - 700014 (Appellant) (Respondent)

10. As regards ground no. 2, the Ld. AO had recorded the satisfaction in the assessment order as under: - “I am satisfied that it is a fit case for initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect of Income from Capital Gain and Income from Other Sources with a motive to avoid payment of taxes and defraud the exchequer