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.

33 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 124clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi351Mumbai333Karnataka120Ahmedabad81Jaipur75Bangalore52Pune48Indore43Raipur43Chennai39Ranchi35Calcutta34Kolkata33Chandigarh29Hyderabad22Allahabad22Agra21Lucknow17Guwahati16Rajkot16Cuttack15Kerala14Visakhapatnam14Surat13Nagpur7Varanasi3Dehradun1Amritsar1SC1Telangana1Panaji1Cochin1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(b)45Section 142(1)32Section 143(3)24Section 14818Addition to Income16Penalty16Section 92C14Section 143(2)14Section 271(1)(c)

SHRI ANIL CHANDRA PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 887/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

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

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act and levy Rs.20,000/- for non-compliance of notices u/s.142(1) of the Act. Therefore, appeal on the referred grounds is dismissed”. Aggrieved by the orders of the ld. CIT(Appeals) confirming the penalties imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(b), the assessee has preferred these appeals before the Tribunal

RANJIT KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Showing 1–20 of 33 · Page 1 of 2

12
Section 132(1)12
Search & Seizure12
Limitation/Time-bar7

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 880/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

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

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act and levy Rs.20,000/- for non-compliance of notices u/s.142(1) of the Act. Therefore, appeal on the referred grounds is dismissed”. Aggrieved by the orders of the ld. CIT(Appeals) confirming the penalties imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(b), the assessee has preferred these appeals before the Tribunal

ACIT, CC-X, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CONCAST STEEL & POWER LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1487/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 69C

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and the same is directed to be deleted. The ground nos. 1 to 4 are allowed.” ITA No.1487/Kol/2012 M/s. Concast Steel & Power Ltd. A.Y.2008-09 5 5. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in 2nd appeal before us. The ld. DR before us submitted that the seized documents

SUBRATA MOITRA,DURGAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1827/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(3)Section 68

Section 271(1)(c ) of the Act of Rs. 10,21,124/- which is worked out hereunder: Income for which inaccurate Particulars were furnished (as discussed above) Rs. 33,04,612/- Tax sought to be evaded Rs. 10,21,124/- Minimum penalty leviable @ 100% of tax sought to be evaded Rs. 10,21,124/- Maximum penalty leviable

COSMAT TRADERS (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 457/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2021AY 2012-13
Section 120Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, dt. 16/03/2020, it came to know about Act, dt. 16/03/2020, it came to know about the ex-parte orders. He also pointed out that the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed off the case orders. He also pointed out that the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed off the case orders

RANJIT KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1745/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Hangshing, CIT(DR)
Section 132(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

RANJIT KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1744/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Hangshing, CIT(DR)
Section 132(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Section 271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

RATAN KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1504/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Ratan Kumar Paul V/S. Dcit, Cc-Xxvii, Thana Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Purva, Gangarampur, Dakshin 110, Shanti Pally, Em Dinajpur, Pin 733 124 By-Pass Kolkata-107 [Pan No.Aklp 6116 F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K.Tiwari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 05-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 21-02-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata Dated 04.05.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Central Circle-Xxvii, Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.03.2014 For Assessment Year 2012-13. Penalty Levied By Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act Vide His Order Dated 03.09.2014. Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ld. Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee & Shri A.K. Tiwari, Ld. Departmental Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Revenue. 2. Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds:- “1. For That On The Fats & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act.

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

124 By-Pass Kolkata-107 [PAN No.AKLP 6116 F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K.Tiwari, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 05-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 21-02-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश

M/S VODAFONE EAST LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T RANGE - 7,KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1864/KOL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

124 STC 426 (Kar.), which has been followed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. v. DIT [2011] 332 ITR 340 / 197 Taxman 263/ 9 taxmann.com 168, in the following terms : "9. Thus if the transaction is one of leasing/hiring/letting simpliciter under which the possession of the goods, i.e., effective and general

SHRI BIJAN KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 873/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.873 To 879/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2012-13) Shri Bijan Kumar Paul Vs. Dcit, Cc-Xxvii, Kolkata Thana Road, Gangarampur, Aayakar Bhawan Purva, 110, Dakshin Dinajpur – 733 124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afbpp 1901 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent By :Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Captioned Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 21, Kolkata In Appeal No.411/Dcit,Cc-4(3),Kol/Cit(A)-21/Kol/14-15 Dated 16.02.2016, Confirming The Penalty Levied By The Ao Of Rs.20,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. These Seven Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.873/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As A Lead Case. 4. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee (In Lead Case In Ita No.873/Kol/2016) Are As Under: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty To The Tune Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Entire Penalty Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed U/S 271(1)(B) Since The Assessee Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause For Non-Appearance During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Avijit Dey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AFBPP 1901 K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) Appellant by :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent by :Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These captioned seven appeals filed

SHRI BIJAN KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 874/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.873 To 879/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2012-13) Shri Bijan Kumar Paul Vs. Dcit, Cc-Xxvii, Kolkata Thana Road, Gangarampur, Aayakar Bhawan Purva, 110, Dakshin Dinajpur – 733 124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afbpp 1901 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent By :Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Captioned Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 21, Kolkata In Appeal No.411/Dcit,Cc-4(3),Kol/Cit(A)-21/Kol/14-15 Dated 16.02.2016, Confirming The Penalty Levied By The Ao Of Rs.20,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. These Seven Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.873/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As A Lead Case. 4. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee (In Lead Case In Ita No.873/Kol/2016) Are As Under: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty To The Tune Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Entire Penalty Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed U/S 271(1)(B) Since The Assessee Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause For Non-Appearance During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Avijit Dey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AFBPP 1901 K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) Appellant by :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent by :Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These captioned seven appeals filed

SHRI BIJAN KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 876/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.873 To 879/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2012-13) Shri Bijan Kumar Paul Vs. Dcit, Cc-Xxvii, Kolkata Thana Road, Gangarampur, Aayakar Bhawan Purva, 110, Dakshin Dinajpur – 733 124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afbpp 1901 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent By :Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Captioned Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 21, Kolkata In Appeal No.411/Dcit,Cc-4(3),Kol/Cit(A)-21/Kol/14-15 Dated 16.02.2016, Confirming The Penalty Levied By The Ao Of Rs.20,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. These Seven Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.873/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As A Lead Case. 4. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee (In Lead Case In Ita No.873/Kol/2016) Are As Under: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty To The Tune Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Entire Penalty Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed U/S 271(1)(B) Since The Assessee Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause For Non-Appearance During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Avijit Dey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AFBPP 1901 K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) Appellant by :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent by :Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These captioned seven appeals filed

SHRI BIJAN KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 879/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.873 To 879/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2012-13) Shri Bijan Kumar Paul Vs. Dcit, Cc-Xxvii, Kolkata Thana Road, Gangarampur, Aayakar Bhawan Purva, 110, Dakshin Dinajpur – 733 124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afbpp 1901 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent By :Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Captioned Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 21, Kolkata In Appeal No.411/Dcit,Cc-4(3),Kol/Cit(A)-21/Kol/14-15 Dated 16.02.2016, Confirming The Penalty Levied By The Ao Of Rs.20,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. These Seven Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.873/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As A Lead Case. 4. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee (In Lead Case In Ita No.873/Kol/2016) Are As Under: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty To The Tune Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Entire Penalty Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed U/S 271(1)(B) Since The Assessee Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause For Non-Appearance During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Avijit Dey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AFBPP 1901 K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) Appellant by :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent by :Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These captioned seven appeals filed

SHRI BIJAN KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 878/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.873 To 879/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2012-13) Shri Bijan Kumar Paul Vs. Dcit, Cc-Xxvii, Kolkata Thana Road, Gangarampur, Aayakar Bhawan Purva, 110, Dakshin Dinajpur – 733 124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afbpp 1901 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent By :Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Captioned Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 21, Kolkata In Appeal No.411/Dcit,Cc-4(3),Kol/Cit(A)-21/Kol/14-15 Dated 16.02.2016, Confirming The Penalty Levied By The Ao Of Rs.20,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. These Seven Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.873/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As A Lead Case. 4. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee (In Lead Case In Ita No.873/Kol/2016) Are As Under: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty To The Tune Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Entire Penalty Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed U/S 271(1)(B) Since The Assessee Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause For Non-Appearance During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Avijit Dey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AFBPP 1901 K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) Appellant by :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent by :Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These captioned seven appeals filed

SHRI BIJAN KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 875/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.873 To 879/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2012-13) Shri Bijan Kumar Paul Vs. Dcit, Cc-Xxvii, Kolkata Thana Road, Gangarampur, Aayakar Bhawan Purva, 110, Dakshin Dinajpur – 733 124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afbpp 1901 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent By :Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Captioned Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 21, Kolkata In Appeal No.411/Dcit,Cc-4(3),Kol/Cit(A)-21/Kol/14-15 Dated 16.02.2016, Confirming The Penalty Levied By The Ao Of Rs.20,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. These Seven Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.873/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As A Lead Case. 4. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee (In Lead Case In Ita No.873/Kol/2016) Are As Under: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty To The Tune Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Entire Penalty Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed U/S 271(1)(B) Since The Assessee Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause For Non-Appearance During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Avijit Dey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AFBPP 1901 K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) Appellant by :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent by :Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These captioned seven appeals filed

SHRI BIJAN KUMAR PAUL,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 877/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.873 To 879/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2012-13) Shri Bijan Kumar Paul Vs. Dcit, Cc-Xxvii, Kolkata Thana Road, Gangarampur, Aayakar Bhawan Purva, 110, Dakshin Dinajpur – 733 124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afbpp 1901 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent By :Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Captioned Seven Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 21, Kolkata In Appeal No.411/Dcit,Cc-4(3),Kol/Cit(A)-21/Kol/14-15 Dated 16.02.2016, Confirming The Penalty Levied By The Ao Of Rs.20,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. These Seven Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Different Assessment Years, Identical Issues Are Involved, Therefore, These Have Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.873/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As A Lead Case. 4. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee (In Lead Case In Ita No.873/Kol/2016) Are As Under: “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty To The Tune Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed By The Ao U/S 271(1)(B) Of The Act. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Entire Penalty Of Rs.20,000/- Imposed U/S 271(1)(B) Since The Assessee Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause For Non-Appearance During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Avijit Dey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

124. Shanti Palli, E.M. By-pass, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AFBPP 1901 K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) Appellant by :Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate Respondent by :Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These captioned seven appeals filed

M/S SHIVA LOKENATH RICE MILL (P) LTD.,DAKSHIN DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CC-XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 813/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT, ld.DR
Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 142Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

section 143(3) of the Act which proves that substantial compliances were made by the assessee. Thus it cannot be held that the default committed by the assessee was willful. Thus, we are inclined not to uphold the order of lower authorities. 9.1 Similarly, we also find that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel (supra

M/S PHILIPS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 539/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

u/s 271(1)(c) 13.1. The Learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271 (1)(c) of the Act. 14. Dividend Distribution Tax 14.1 The learned AO erred in wrongly computing additional tax and interest payable on distributed profit of Rs. 4,44,320 without assigning any reason thereto. The appellant submits that the above grounds are independent

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PHILIPS INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 863/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

u/s 271(1)(c) 13.1. The Learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271 (1)(c) of the Act. 14. Dividend Distribution Tax 14.1 The learned AO erred in wrongly computing additional tax and interest payable on distributed profit of Rs. 4,44,320 without assigning any reason thereto. The appellant submits that the above grounds are independent

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

ITA 1899/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act mechanically and without recording any satisfaction for its initiation. The above grounds are without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave to alter, amend or withdraw all or any of the grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing.” Additional