ITO, WD.9(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S MAHARAJ VINCOM PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata……………….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…..…..... Respondent 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] C.O. No.6/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…....... Cross-Objector 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] Vs Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata …………..….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 07, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: This Appeal By The Revenue & Corresponding Cross-Objection By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated 08.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

154. The bench minutely analysed law in this regard and applying the principle of 'coram non judice' and following aforesaid judgments of the supreme court, it was held that if an assessee seeks to challenge the reassessment proceedings as being without jurisdiction, when action for rectification is sought to be taken on the assumption of the validity of the reassessment

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KKALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.452/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata Vs Kkalpana Industries India Ltd. 2B, Pretoria Street, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aabck 2239 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 13.11.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070338584(1), For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Ms. Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. A Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Find That The Appeal Of The Revenue Has Been Filed Belatedly By 28 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Thus, The Delay Of 28 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

154. The said power can be exercised when mistake is apparent. Even mistake cannot be rectified where it may be a mere possible view or where the issues are debatable. Even the Tribunal has limited jurisdiction under section 254(2). Thus, when the Assessing Officer or the Tribunal has considered the matter in detail and the view taken

BIMLA DEVI AGRAWAL,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T./D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be, is less than sixty days, such remaining period shall be extended to sixty days and the aforesaid period of limitation shall be deemed to be extended accordingly:” 11. Since the reference was made to the AVO on 07.11.2019, the valuation report dated 19.12.2019 was received

NARAYAN BARTER PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-6(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 154 of the Act, which allows for the correction of any mistake apparent from the record in the assessment order. It is clarified that this procedure is intended to address mathematical or clerical discrepancies without affecting the substantive findings of the assessment. The assessee may submit a written application to the AO providing the relevant details and supporting documents

M/S VINAYAK FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA

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

section 143(3)-\nonly recorded by Assessing Officer must be considered: - [Prashant S. Joshl v. ITO\n(2010) 324 ITR 154 (Bom.)\nThe Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata (in the decision dated 02.11.2018), in the case of Proficient\nCommodities Pvt Ltd v DCIT, Cir 5(1) Kol [ITA No 2307 & 20308/Kol/2017] held as\nunder:\n\"6. Applying the propositions

HIMADRI VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, (OSD), WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

154 / 147 143(3) of the Act by the Ld. ACIT(OSD), Ward-i(i), Kolkata rectifying the assessment order dated 27.12.2017 by levying interest under section 234 of the Act by observing as under; “In the instance case order u/s. 147/143(3) of the I. T. Act for the AY 2010- 11 was passed on 27.12.2017, with assessed income

LINEAR DEALERS PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154

KRYPTON INDUSTRIES LIMITED,FALTA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1186/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Krypton Industries Ltd.…………………..……..…………………....Appellant Plot 31 & 32, Sector-1, Falta, 24 North Parganas, W.B – 743504. [Pan: Aabck0868N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata……………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala & Vidhi Ladia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 31, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Kolkata, Dated 31.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order Under Section 147/143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Information Was Received From The Investigation Wing, Kolkata, Indicating That The Assessee-Company Had Taken Bogus Purchases From One Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh To Reduce Its Taxable Income. A Search Under Section 132 Of The Act Was Conducted On The Said Person & His Statement Was Recorded. Based On The Appraisal Report & Material Found During The Search, It Was Alleged That The Assessee Was One Of The Beneficiaries Of Such Bogus

154 dated 30.11.2022, whereas the appeal filed by the assessee was specifically against the assessment order dated 22.11.2018 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2014–15. Instead of adjudicating the grounds raised in the appeal against the reassessment

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1-(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KKALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2589/Kol/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-2011) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4), Vs Kkalpana Industries India Ltd. 4Th Floor, Room No.3, New Kolkata B.K.Market, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aabck 2239 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 10.07.2024 Of The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Passed For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. Shri Pankaj Pandey, Ld. Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Barred By 79 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Accordingly, Delay Of 79 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 4. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Dr That The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Originally Processed U/S.143(1) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Assessment Was Reopened By Issuing Of Notice U/S.148 Of The Act Dated

reassessment proceedings could be initiated for a period prior to the specified date as per the scheme of amalgamation even against a non-existent entity, is an argument which is clearly untenable in view of the ratio of the aforementioned judgments. A similar view has been expressed by this Court in the case of CLSA India

R D TEA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1555/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 R D Tea Limited……………………..……………………………..………….……Appellant Dhandhania House, 2Nd Floor, 4, Middleton Street, Kolkata – 700071. [Pan: Aabcr3010M] Vs. Acit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata…..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 22, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.06.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Company Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13 On 30.09.2012 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.67,34,990/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Assessed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 19.03.2015 By Assessing Total Income Of Rs.86,23,780/- Which Was Subsequently Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act On 27.04.2015 By Assessing Total Income Of Rs.83,90,960/-. Thereafter, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 Of The Act On 27.03.2019 After Obtaining Approval From The Competent Authority. In Response To Such Notice, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Again Declaring The Same Income As Earlier I.E. Rs.67,34,990/-. During The

154 of the Act on 27.04.2015 by assessing total income of Rs.83,90,960/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing a notice u/s 148 of the Act on 27.03.2019 after obtaining approval from the competent authority. In response to such notice, the assessee filed its return of income again declaring

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]

154 of the Act.” 6. The Ld. Pr. CIT rejected all the contentions raised by the assessee and set aside the assessment order dated 27.12.2017 passed u/s. 147 read with section 144 of the Act by directing the AO to conduct proper enquiry and verification of the information received from the Investigation Wing. 7. The Ld. AR vehemently submitted before

PEACEFUL AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED (NOW MERGED WITH NIRMITI REALTIES PRIVATE LIMITED),NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD 10(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment without properly serving the notice under Section 148 on the assessee. 8) That the assessee craves to leave, add, alter or amend any of the grounds on or before the time of hearing of appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed the return of income electronically declaring total income

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

154 / 143(3) read with Section 144C was passed on 31.10.2016 with total income of Rs. 4,11,86,92,370/-. Subsequently the AO reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2017 and the assessment was framed u/s 147/144/254/143(3) dated 27.12.2016 by making various additions. Pertinent to note that

M/S PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY PHILIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

154 / 143(3) read with Section 144C was passed on 31.10.2016 with total income of Rs. 4,11,86,92,370/-. Subsequently the AO reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2017 and the assessment was framed u/s 147/144/254/143(3) dated 27.12.2016 by making various additions. Pertinent to note that

GARUD CREDIT & HOLDING PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Garud Credit & Holding Pvt. Limited,.........Appellant D.J. Shah & Co., 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Aaacg9791P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 O R D E R

reassessment proceedings on the issue which has been referred to by the ld. CIT in the impugned order and since the ld. Assessing Officer has taken a permissible view in law, therefore, ld. CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act. The assesese placed reliance on plethora of judgments and the same are referred below:- S.No. Title

DEBANJAN CHATTERJEE,KOLKATA vs. D.D.I.T., CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1959/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-2022 Debanjan Chatterjee,……..…………….…………Appellant C-3/14, East Enclave Cooperative Society, Rajarhat, Kolkata-700156 [Pan:Aezpc7707H] -Vs.- Deputy Director Of Income Tax,………………Respondent Cpc, Bengluru, Bangalore-560500 Appearances By: Shri Nilesh Kariya, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. Cit,Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 28, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 02, 2024 O R D E R

154 of the Act when the assessee filed form 67 before the AO. In our opinion the credit in respect of foreign tax cannot be denied to the assessee for the technicality of not filing the form 67 within the due date of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision

ANINDYA SARKAR,KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALRU

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

154 of the Act when the assessee filed form 67 before the AO. In our opinion the credit in respect of foreign tax cannot be denied to the assessee for the technicality of not filing the form 67 within the due date of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee finds 5 Anindya Sarkar

NARAYAN SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 68 of the Act. From this type\nof attitude of both the officers, high-handleness towards your\nappellant can be easily understood which is the main subject matter\nof this appeal. In a very recent judgement dated 11/08/2022 in the\ncase of S.R. Cold Storage -Vs- Union of India in Writ Tax No. 723 of\n2022, their Lordship