THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(2), GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED , GANGTOK SIKKIM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

152 taxmann.com 382) (Mumbai Trib.) has held that where Assessing Officer made addition under section 43CA read with section 56(2) (x), case of assessee did not fall in category of under reporting of income and moreover since in penalty notice under section 270A revenue had failed to specify limb "under-reporting" or "misreporting" of income, under which penalty proceedings

BIRESWAR DUTT ESTATES PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 5(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2011-12

152 of 2015 in PCIT vs. Oberoi Hotels ITA No.1567/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2011-12 Bireswar Dutta Estates Pvt. Vs. ITO Wd-5(3), Kol. Page 2 Pvt. Ltd. decided on 22.06.2018 holds that such re-assessment is not sustainable in law as follows:- The Court : The substantial questions of law that have arisen arc in the context of reassessment proceedings initiated

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ALEMBIC MERCHANTS PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue fails

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Central Cir-1(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Alembic Merchants Pvt. Ltd Pan: Aacca 0918Q Appellant Respondent

152 are substantially different from the provisions as they stood prior to 19 A.Y 2009-10 M/s. Alembic Merchants P.Ltd such substitutions. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed

BUDHIYA AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1231/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष"S / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Budhiya Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Kolkata

152 are substantially different from the provisions as they stood prior to such substitutions. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed

PANKAJ DUTTA,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3),DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2206/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Pankaj Dutta..........................................................................................Appellant Prop. Annapurna Construction, M-95A, Yuri Gagarin Path, Bidhannagore, Durgapur - 713212 [Pan : Ahdpd1092P] Income Tax Officer...................…………………………………….........Respondent Ward 1(3), Aayakar Bhawan, City Centre, Durgapur - 713216 Appearances By: Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Biswanath Das, Addl Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 17, 2017 Order This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Cit (Appeals) Durgapur Dated 31.08.2016 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Additional Ground Of Appeal Which Reads As Follows: “Because That The Ld. Income Tax Officer Was Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Passing Of The Order U/S 147/143(3) Dated 30Th March, 2015 Without Issue Of The Statutory Notice U/S 143(2) Of The It Act, 1961 & As Such His Reassessment Order Is Not Good In Law & Void Abinitio. 3. As This Is A Legal Ground, Challenging The Jurisdiction Of The Assessing Officer. As All The Facts Required To Adjudicate This Grounds

reassessment year involved relates to the period prior to the insertion of section 292BB. In this view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. DCIT vs M/s. Silver Line, ITA No. 1809, 1504, 1505 & 1506/Del/2013 vii. The Hon’ble ITAT of Agra Bench, in the case of ITO vs Aligarh Auto Centre reported

ALOSHA MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member)

152 taxmann.com 559 (Karnataka). 7. On the other hand, ld. D.R. vehemently argued supporting the order of ld. CIT(Appeals). 8. I have heard the rival contentions and gone through the material placed before us. Reassessment proceedings under section

M/S. DEVANSH EXPORTS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 32, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

152 are substantially different from the provisions as they stood prior to such substitutions. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed

SRI UDIT KUMAR DUGAR ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

152 are substantially different from the provisions as they stood prior to such 9 Shri Udit Kumar Dugar, AY 2012-13 substitutions. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed

RADIX TIE-UP PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-11(2), KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Sri S. S. Godara] आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.2404/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Radix Tie-Up Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-11(2), Kolkata 184/A, Regent Colony, Tollygunge, Kolkata – 700001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecr1237M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 4, Kolkata’S Order Dated 10.05.2019 Passed In Case No.791/Cit(A)-4/16-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. For The Reasons Stated In Assessee’S Condonation Petition Dated 27.01.20 Explaining Five Days’ Delay To Be Attributable To Various Procedural Aspects & Compilation Of Necessary Records & On Account Of No Objection From The Revenue Side, I Condone The Impugned Delay Of Five Days In Filing Of The Instant Appeal & Proceed To Adjudicate The Same On Merits.

reassessment or recomputation to be made in pursuance of the notice is to be made on him as the agent of such non-resident, the notice shall not be issued after the expiry of a period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. I.T.A No.2404/Kol/2019 Radix Tie-up Pvt. Ltd. 8. Sri Nikhil Agrawal, learned counsel

SUPERTON ELECTRONICS (P) LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

152 of 2015, GA No. 3671 of 2015 judgement dated 22.06.2018, wherein the Hon’ble High Court had considered the issue and held that, failure to issue statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act would result in the entire proceedings, including any order of assessment being bad in law. Reliance was also placed on the judgement of the ITAT

SUPERTON ELECTRONICS (P) LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

152 of 2015, GA No. 3671 of 2015 judgement dated 22.06.2018, wherein the Hon’ble High Court had considered the issue and held that, failure to issue statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act would result in the entire proceedings, including any order of assessment being bad in law. Reliance was also placed on the judgement of the ITAT

AJAY TRADING COMPANY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIR. 3(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 147 of the Act provides that reopening after a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year where assessment has been framed u/s 143(3) can only be made , if escapement of income has taken place because of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any material fact in the return of income

DAULAL KOTHARI,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1065/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Daulal Kothari -Vs- Dcit, Circle-44, Kolkata [Pan: Aiypk 2894 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment was completed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act on 04.03.2015 determining the total income at Rs. 74,29,230/- . In the re assessment, a sum of Rs. 9,94,152/- was added by the ld. AO towards long term capital gain. Brief facts of this addition is that the assessee sold two properties during the year under appeal

SANJAY KUMAR SURANA,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm ]

152 of 2015, GA No. 3671 of 2015 dt. 22-06-2018, wherein the Hon’ble High Court held as under:- The two substantial questions of law are answered accordingly as follows: (1) If the time for issuance of the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act has expired or the time for completing the reassessment

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORISSA MINERALS DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue ( in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.826,827&828/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2010-11)

reassessment order. On perusal of the monthly returns filed in Form No.F-1 for the months of March, 2008 and April, 2008 ill respect of the said Kolha Roida (Bhadrasai-2) Mine, it is clear that the closing stock figure of Iron Ore as on 31.01.2008 was 016,911.570, as against the opening stock figure of 653,612.950 appearing

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORISSA MINERALS DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue ( in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.826,827&828/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2010-11)

reassessment order. On perusal of the monthly returns filed in Form No.F-1 for the months of March, 2008 and April, 2008 ill respect of the said Kolha Roida (Bhadrasai-2) Mine, it is clear that the closing stock figure of Iron Ore as on 31.01.2008 was 016,911.570, as against the opening stock figure of 653,612.950 appearing

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORISSA MINERALS DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue ( in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.826,827&828/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2010-11)

reassessment order. On perusal of the monthly returns filed in Form No.F-1 for the months of March, 2008 and April, 2008 ill respect of the said Kolha Roida (Bhadrasai-2) Mine, it is clear that the closing stock figure of Iron Ore as on 31.01.2008 was 016,911.570, as against the opening stock figure of 653,612.950 appearing

BMEL INFRA INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT-3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 385/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bmel Infra India Ltd. -Vs.- C.I.T.-3, Kolkata Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaccb 6325 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Vigyaneshwar Nath Datta, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri Bani Brata Dutta, Addl. Cit.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.04.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 03.05.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25.03.2015 Of C.I.T.(A)-Kolkata-3, Kolkata Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act).

section 263 of the Act would begin to run from the date of the order of assessment and not from the order of reassessment. The revisional jurisdiction having, thus, been invoked by the Commissioner of Income-tax beyond the period of limitation, it was wholly without jurisdiction rendering the entire proceeding a nullity.” 10. Our attention was also drawn

ACIT, CC- 3(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HIMATSINGKA SEIDE LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalit(Ss)A No.17/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of 10/24, Kumara Krupa Road, High Vs. Income Tax, Central Circle- Grounds, Bangalore-560001. Xvi, Kolkata. (Pan: Aaach3507N) (Appellant) (Respondent) & It(Ss)A No.20/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years on the date of initiation of search u/s. 132 of the Act. The impugned assessment year is a year which falls within the period of six assessment years considering the date of search as 22.09.2011. Admittedly, the assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) were pending