I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be, shall, after the exclusion of the period under sub-section (4) of section 245HA, be not less than one year; and where such period of limitation is less than one year, it shall be deemed to have been extended to one year; and for the purposes of determining the period of limitation

M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD.,SILIGURI vs. PCIT-1, , KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be, shall, after the exclusion of the period under sub-section (4) of section 245HA, be not less than one year; and where such period of limitation is less than one year, it shall be deemed to have been extended to one year; and for the purposes of determining the period of limitation

ANANDA PAUL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands are allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2007-08 Ananda Paul V/S. Acit, Circle-50, Cf-125, Salt Lake City, Manicktala Civic Centre, Kolkata-64 Uttarpan Complex, Ds- [Pan No.Afkpp 2201 D] 2&3, Kolkata-54 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri S. Dasagupta, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 12-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 20-04-2018 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)-Xxxii, Kolkata Dated 05.11.2014. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-50 Kolkata U/S 147/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 30.12.2011 For Assessment Year 2007-08. Shri, S.K. Tulsiyan, Ld. Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee & Shri S. Dasgupta, Ld. Departmental Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Revenue. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1) That On The Fats & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Treating The Re-Assessment Proceeding U/S 143(3)/147 Of The It Act, 1961 As Invalid, Bad In Law, Unjust & Contrary To The Facts & Law. 2) That On The Facts & In Respect To The Circumstances Of Thee Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Assessment Order Passed U/S. 143(3)/147 Of The It Act, 1961 By The Ld. Ao As Proper & Valid Without Considering The

reassess such income. Thereafter the appellant would like to submit that reason to believe being the foremost criteria for reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Act, it should be interpreted in the right perspective. 'Reason to believe' cannot be reason to suspect merely. There must be a direct nexus between the material coming to the notice

ACIT, CIRCLLE-34, KOLKATA vs. SUBHAS KUMAR KEDIA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1677/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Acit, Circle-34, Kolkata Vs Subhas Kumar Kedia, 41, N.S.Road, Kolkata Pan No. :Afnpk 9669 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Shreya Loyalka, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 05.06.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- I) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order U/S.148A(D) & All Subsequent Proceedings. Ii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Failed To Acknowledge The Fact That The Assesse Had Not Expressed Any Grievance Against The Validity Of Order U/S 148A(D) By Moving Any Writ Petition Which Should Have Been Done In Case Of Any Grievance After Getting The Sald Order U/S.148A(D). Iii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order When The Ld. Cit(A) Has No Jurisdiction To Deal With The Question Whether The 148A(D) Order Was Passed Validly Or Properly As An Order U/S.148A(D) Is Not An Appealable Order Before Ld. Cit(A) As Per Section 246A.

section 148, the prerequisite is there should be a valid notice. Admittedly, in the case on hand, the natice was held to be not sustainable. If that be so, the assessing officer cannot be stated to be empowered to make a roving enquiry into other issues which according to him came to his notice during the reassessment proceedings. The foundation

JIYA EXIM PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 5(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment order under Section 147/143(1) of the Income Tax Act,\n1961 passed by the Assessing officer without disposing of the objection raised by\nthe appellant, contrary to binding principle of law laid down in the judgment of the\nHon'ble Supreme Court whereby it has been stated that non compliance of\nprocedure would not make an order void

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DHANSAR ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

150 of the Act. For the sake of reference, the said section deserves to be reproduced as under: "(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 149, the notice under section 148 may be issued at any time for the purpose of making an assessment or reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1173 & 1175/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata.……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Raja Shelters Pvt. Ltd…………………….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 25A, S. P. Mukherjee Road, Kol- 700025. [Pan: Aadcr5073Q] Appearances By: Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2013-14 Against Separate Orders Dated 21.02.2025 & 25.02.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

150 of the Act. For the sake of reference, the said section deserves to be reproduced as under: "(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 149, the notice under section 148 may be issued at any time for the purpose of making an Raja Shelters Pvt. Ltd assessment or reassessment

KIPPY ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment\nproceedings were wrongly initiated vide notice dated 14.03.2019 u/s. 148 and that the\nmandatory approval of the sanctioning authority i.e. the principal commissioner of\nincome tax as required to be obtained u/s. 151 of the act is invalid.\n(b) That the sanctioning authority i.e. the principal commissioner of income tax has not\napplied his mind while granting

MAITHAN CERAMIC LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

150\n6B, Bentinck Street, Aloka House\n23.01.2012\n10,000,000\nChq\nKolkata-700 001\n27.03.2012\n730,327\nChq\n811,475\n81,148\nPA No. AAACN 8759L\nR.A.Trading Pvt Ltd\n10,570,575\n21.06.2011\n570,575\nChq\nYes\n10,570,575\n1.R.N.Mkukherjee, 5th Floor\n28.03.2012\n10,000,000\nRTGS\nKolkata-700 001\n31.03.2012\n890,164\nChq\n989,071\n98,907\nPan

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the revenue are\ndismissed

150 of the\nAct. For the sake of reference, the said section deserves to be reproduced\nas under:\n"(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 149, the notice under\nsection 148 may be issued at any time for the purpose of making an\nassessment or reassessment

MADHUBAN DEALERS PVT. LTD. PRESENTLY KNOWN AS MADHUBAN DEALERS LLP,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-13, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

reassessment order u/s. 144 read with section 147 of the Act dated 27.12.1970 itself suffered from the fundamental infirmity and jurisdiction defect thereby rendering all the consequential action and proceeding including revisionary order u/s. 263 as nonest in the eyes of law. The Ld. AR submitted that in an appeal against the order of 263 of the Act which ceased

M/S. DIACH CHEMICALS & PIGMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HOWRAH vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), KOLKATA - 2,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.697/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S Diach Chemicals & Pigments Pvt. Ltd.………....Appellant Nh-6, Jaladhulagori Dhulaghar Industrial Park, Howrah-711302. [Pan: Aaccd1101A] Vs. Pcit, Central-2, Kolkata…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 25, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit), Kolkata, Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case The Assessee Fled Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,24,05,910/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act On 23.04.2021 Determining Assessed Income At Rs.4,75,81,150/-. Subsequently, Pursuant To A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Act In The Case Of The Diach Group Conducted On 07.12 2021 & Subsequent Dates, The Assessing Officer Reopened The Case Under Section 147 & Passed A Reassessment Order Dated 28.03 2023. In The Reassessment Order, The Ao Made An Addition Of Rs.96,84,5467/- On Account Of Bogus Purchases Under

150/-. Subsequently, pursuant to a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act in the case of the Diach Group conducted on 07.12 2021 and subsequent dates, the Assessing Officer reopened the case under section 147 and passed a reassessment

M/S. G.S. ATWAL & COMPANY (ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

reassessment order u/s. 147/143 dated 19.12.2013 without reasonable opportunity of hearing although the assessment will be barred by limitation on 31.03.2015, as the total interest awarded ,of Rs. 10,58,25,030/- to be divided equally in 10 assessment year i.e. Rs. 105,82,503/- for the assessment year 2005-06. That the basis for reopening the assessment

M/S. G.S. ATWAL & COMPANY (ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

reassessment order u/s. 147/143 dated 19.12.2013 without reasonable opportunity of hearing although the assessment will be barred by limitation on 31.03.2015, as the total interest awarded ,of Rs. 10,58,25,030/- to be divided equally in 10 assessment year i.e. Rs. 105,82,503/- for the assessment year 2005-06. That the basis for reopening the assessment

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRD COMMODITIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] It(Ss)A Nos.120 To123/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2012-13

reassessment proceedings was bad in law as it did not satisfy the condition precedent in the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act. 18. We also find merit in the alternate contention made by the Ld. AR that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 31-03-2016 without first forming reasons to believe that income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJSHRI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

Section 148A(d) of the Act use a template/general reason to reject the defence of the assessee on merits, namely, "found devoid of any merit because the assessee company has failed to produce the relevant documents in respect of transactions mentioned in show cause notice it is established that the assessee has no proper explanation……" Consequently, this Court

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJSHRI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

Section 148A(d) of the Act use a template/general reason to reject the defence of the assessee on merits, namely, "found devoid of any merit because the assessee company has failed to produce the relevant documents in respect of transactions mentioned in show cause notice it is established that the assessee has no proper explanation……" Consequently, this Court

I.T.O., WARD-30(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI PARTHA SARATHI MITRA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

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

150, 151 held that- “Service of the notice under section 148 after issuing the same within the period of limitation prescribed under section 149 being a condition precedent for the exercise of jurisdiction, if the Assessing Officer was unable to prove that the notice was duly served upon the assessee after issuing the same within the prescribed period, any return

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

150(2) would not stand in the way of\ninitiating proceedings u/s 147:\n11 Reasons for the belief that income has escaped As per separate sheet. (Annex-\"A\")\nassessment.\nDated\n12 Whether the Addl. CIT/ Joint CIT is satisfied on\nthe reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer\nthat it is a fit case for the issue of a notice