AJIT KUMAR,BOKARO vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), IT, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

exempted u/s 10 (4) of the Act. Reassessment proceddings set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.” 2.2. Now, so far the submission

RAMOTAR CHOUDHARI HUF,KOLKATA vs. PCIT 5 KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1336/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ramotar Choudhari Huf.……..…………............…...……………....Appellant 7Th Floor, R.N 25 Fortuna Tower, 23A N.S. Road, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aanhr9093K] Vs. Pcit-5, Kolkata………….…...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Pransukha, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 06, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 09, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 18.10.2023 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,55,970/- On 21.01.2014. Thereafter, An Information Was Received By The Assessing Officer From Investigation Wing That The Assessee Has

reassessment proceedings he has filed supporting evidences of genuine exempt income u/s 10(38) and has also attended the video

SWETA CHIRIMAR,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 29(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm &Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am]

exemption in the income tax return but thereafter during the course of reassessment proceedings accepted the said sum as income

SARIKA DUGAR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

exemption in the income tax return but thereafter during the course of reassessment proceedings accepted the said sum as income

DCIT,CIRCLE-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CHEVIOT CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed and COs of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

reassessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide his order dated 24.12.2010 and disallowed the claim of exemption

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

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

reassessment proceeding was carried out. During the course of assessment proceedings, ld. Assessing Officer found that the assessee has shown exempt

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

reassessment proceeding was carried out. During the course of assessment proceedings, ld. Assessing Officer found that the assessee has shown exempt

USHA DEVI MITTAL AGARWAL,GANGTOK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), GANGTOK, SIKKIM

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

exemption u/s 10(26AAA) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The case of the assessee was selected for reassessment

D.C.I.T., CC-3(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. FORUM PROJECT PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the three captioned appeals of the revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.(Ss)A Nos.108,109&585/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Dcit, Cc-3(2), Kolkata..................................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd...........................……........……...…..…..Respondent 4/1, Red Cross Place, Dalhousie, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aadcs7575E] Appearances By: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 30, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 05, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Dated 20.05.2022, 08.06.2022 & 25.11.2014 Respectively Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Contesting Therein The Confirmation Of Additions Made By The Assessing Officer (In Short ‘The A.O) In The Assessments Carried Out U/S 153A Of The Act. Since The Facts & Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Identical, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. First We Take Revenue’S Appeal In Ita No.108/Kol/2022 For Assessment Year 2010-11. I.T.(Ss)A Nos.108,109&585/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd.

exempt income. Without prejudice to the above observation, the ld. CIT(A) further held that since this was a case of reassessment

HARSH COMTRADE PVT LTD,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(4), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.225/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Harsh Comtrade Private Limited, Vs Ito, Ward-5(4), Kolkata 1/A, Stuti Apartment, Near Ashok Panhouse, City Light, Surat, Gujarat Pan No. :Aabcg 8847 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Mehul Shah, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 28.12.2023, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059161646(1) For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. Shri Mehul Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Submitted That He Has Filed Written Submissions Before The Tribunal Which Has Been Placed In The Paper Book At Pages 90 To 104 Which Reads As Follows :- Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata - 'Smc' Bench In The Case Of Harsh Comtrade Pvt. Ltd Sub: Written Submission For A.Y. 2012-13 Ref: Assessee'S Appeal No. 225/Kol/2024 Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2024 May It Please To Your Honour 1. In This Case, The Case Is Re-Opened On The Basis Of Reasons For Reopening Recorded On 23.03.2018. The Same Is Reproduced

reassessment, he could not make additions on some other grounds which did not form part of reasons recorded by him. d. CIT(Exemption

ROHIT JALAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2205/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment order the addition is in respect of the LTCG claim of the assessee in respect of sale of scrip of M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. as exempt

DIPTI MEHTA ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 43(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

reassessment order on 28.02.2015 wherein the AO made addition of Rs. 19,22,905/-, not accepting the claim of the share transactions which the assessee declared as exempt

JERMEL'S ACCADEMY,SILIGURI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(4), , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the directions mentioned above

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

exemption under sections 11 & 12 on account of not having complied with the requirements of section 12A(1)(b). Since this was the sole basis for upholding the validity of the reassessment

QUALITY BAGS EXPORTERS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CC-IV, KOL, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos. 2787 To 2790/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2001-02,2002-03,2003-04 & 2004-05

exemption U/S 80HHC to the tune of Rs. 1,34,76,630/- which was allowed by the Ld. AO. vide an order u/s 143(3). (2) Subsequently, the case was reopened and finally the reassessment

BENGAL STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 11(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2012-13

reassessed at Rs. 81,17,907 after set- off of long term capital loss of Rs.40,31,675. This set-off of LTCL arises from transfer of share/M.F., the income of which qualify for exemption

PATTON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

exempt income and denial of deduction for donations under Section 80G.", "held": "For AY 2018-19, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back to the AO for de novo reassessment

JCIT (OSD), CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KHAITAN INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

reassessment proceedings after reopening the assessment u/s 148/147 that the assessee had not computed its income as per Rule 7 of Income Tax Rules 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’). During the hearing, the AO was of the opinion that the assessee has claimed exemption

JCIT (OSD), CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KHAITAN INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

reassessment proceedings after reopening the assessment u/s 148/147 that the assessee had not computed its income as per Rule 7 of Income Tax Rules 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’). During the hearing, the AO was of the opinion that the assessee has claimed exemption

SUSANTA MALLICK,KALIKAPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1),, KOLKATA

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

exemption u/s 10(38) on LTCG (long term capital gains) amounting to Rs. 68.64 lakhs, which upon enquiry by AO was found as bogus and fictitious and notice u/s 148 dated 29/07/2022 was issued (as per procedure ) , and reassessment