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’).

159 ITR 956 (SC) : "The principles on this branch of law are well-settled. To confer jurisdiction under clause (a) of section 147 of the Act beyond the period of four years but within a period of eight years from the end of the relevant year under section 148,. . . two conditions were required to be fulfilled: the first is that

ESTATE OF ARJUN DAS AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-40(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.373/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Estate Of Arjun Das Agarwal………………………… ........................……Appellant Flat No.3B, 19-B, Richie Road, Ballygunge, Kolkata – 700019. [Pan: Aabae1990M] Vs. Ito, Ward-40(3), Kolkata…...................…................…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 12, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 10, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By Estate Of Arjun Das Agarwal Through Sri Vivek Agarwal In A Representive Capacity, Against The Order Dated 31.01.2024 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. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2012-13 Was Filed By Sri Arjun Dass Agarwal During His Life Time On 31.03.2014 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,43,159/- & The Same Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 26.07.2014. Shri Arjun Dass Agarwal Died On 11.12.2015. Thereafter, The Assessing Officer Received Some Information Regarding Transaction Of Immovable Property Done By Sri

section 159 of the Act: “159. (1)Where a person dies, his legal representative shall be liable to pay any sum which the deceased would have been liable to pay if he had not died, in the like manner and to the same extent as the deceased. I.T.A No.373/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Estate of Arjun Das Agarwal

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(2), JALPAIGURI vs. SMT. SUBBULAKSHMI DEVADOSS L/H OF LATE SHRI NIRMAL PALIT, CHANNAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

159. (1) Where a person dies, his legal representative shall be liable to pay any sum which the deceased would have been liable to pay if he had not died, in the like manner and to the same extent as the deceased. (2) For the purpose of making an assessment (including an assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section

SATISH KUMAR BIRDIKA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 49(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

159 taxmann.com 178 held that where more than three years had expired 8 I.T.A. No. 1359/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Satish Kumar Birdika from the end of assessment year 2018-19, sanctioning authority under section 151 (ii) should have been Principal Chief Commissioner and not Principal Commissioner and, thus, order under section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 issued

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.

reassessment proceedings has been laid down is reproduced below: "When a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is issued, the proper course of action is to file the return and, if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing the notices. The assessing officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KANORIA CHEMICALS AND INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross-objection of the assessee both are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S.V. Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 944/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07 D.C.I.T., Cir – 10(1)..…………………………………………………………...............................Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 069. M/S. Kanoria Chemicals & Industries Ltd.................................…..................Respondent Park Plaza, 71, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Aabck 1291 K] C.O. No. 38/Kol/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 944/Kol/2016) Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Kanoria Chemicals & Industries Ltd.................................…........................Appellant Park Plaza, 71, Park Street, Kolkata – 700 016. [Pan: Aabck 1291 K] D.C.I.T., Cir – 10(1)..………………………………………………………….............................Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 069. Appearances By: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 14, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 16, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(Appeals) – 10, Kolkata Dated 26.02.2016 & The Same Is Being Disposed Of Along With The Cross-Objection Filed By The Assessee Being C.O. No. 38/K/2016. 2. The Solitary Issue Involved In The Appeal Of The Revenue Relates To The Deletion Of The Ld. Cit(A) Of The Addition Of Rs. 2,13,47,159/-

159/- and the deduction under section 80IA to that extent was wrongly allowed to it in the assessment completed under section 143(3) leading to escapement of income. He, therefore, reopened the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 on 31.03.2010 after recording the reasons. The assessee company raised objection to the initiation of reassessment

AJAY GOEL, LEGAL HEIR OF LATE MANJU GOEL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2450/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Ajay Goel (Legal Heir Of Late Manju Goel),…Appellant Flat 4H, 4Th Floor, Lake Plaza, 277, Jessore Road, Lake Town, Kolkata-700048 [Pan:Adcpg2207N] -Vs.- Assessing Officer,…………..……….…………...Respondent National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: March 10, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 28, 2025 O R D E R

reassessment proceedings initiated by the ld. Assessing Officer against the death person is not valid under the eyes of law. The ld. CIT(Appeals) also has not taken any step to initiate the proceedings against the legal representative as prescribed under section 159

SULOCHANA DEVI BAGARIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 44(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1208 To 1211/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sulochana Devi Bagaria..……………………………………….……….……Appellant 200, Bangur Avenue, Block-A, Kol-700055. [Pan: Aebpb4214J] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, 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:

reassessment proceedings initiated by the ld. Assessing Officer against the dead person is not valid under the eyes of law. The ld. CIT(Appeals) also has not taken any step to initiate the proceedings against the legal representative as prescribed under section 159

SULOCHANA DEVI BAGARIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 44(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1208 To 1211/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sulochana Devi Bagaria..……………………………………….……….……Appellant 200, Bangur Avenue, Block-A, Kol-700055. [Pan: Aebpb4214J] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, 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:

reassessment proceedings initiated by the ld. Assessing Officer against the dead person is not valid under the eyes of law. The ld. CIT(Appeals) also has not taken any step to initiate the proceedings against the legal representative as prescribed under section 159

SULOCHANA DEVI BAGARIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 44(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1208 To 1211/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sulochana Devi Bagaria..……………………………………….……….……Appellant 200, Bangur Avenue, Block-A, Kol-700055. [Pan: Aebpb4214J] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, 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:

reassessment proceedings initiated by the ld. Assessing Officer against the dead person is not valid under the eyes of law. The ld. CIT(Appeals) also has not taken any step to initiate the proceedings against the legal representative as prescribed under section 159

SULOCHANA DEVI BAGARIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 44(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1208 To 1211/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sulochana Devi Bagaria..……………………………………….……….……Appellant 200, Bangur Avenue, Block-A, Kol-700055. [Pan: Aebpb4214J] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, 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:

reassessment proceedings initiated by the ld. Assessing Officer against the dead person is not valid under the eyes of law. The ld. CIT(Appeals) also has not taken any step to initiate the proceedings against the legal representative as prescribed under section 159

DCIT,CIRCLE-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

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, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001. 3.3.2. We are aware that the computation mechanism provided in Rule 8D would sometimes result in absurdity

UCO BANK,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

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, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001. 3.3.2. We are aware that the computation mechanism provided in Rule 8D would sometimes result in absurdity

PRICE WATERHOUSE & CO., [NOW KNOWN AS PRICE WATERHOUSE & CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS LLP],KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 22, , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. Dcit, Circle-22, Kolkata Price Waterhouse & Co, Kolkata (Now Versus Known As Price Waterhouse & Co Chartered Accountants Llp)

159 CTR (SC) 114 : (2000) 242 ITR 381 (SC), the Supreme Court observed : 16 Price Waterhouse & Co. (now known as Price Waterhouse & Co Chartered Accountants LLP) "It is settled law that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of, notice for reassessment under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, cannot be issued, i.e. no reassessment proceedings

M/S PARAMOUNT PROPERTIES & ESTATE DEVELOPMENTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed on legal grounds

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedi.T.A. No.93/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2005-06 M/S. Paramount Properties & I.T.O., Wd-3(1), Kolkata. P-7, Chowringhee Square, Estate Developments Ltd. -Vs- Kolkata – 700 069. 3, Pretoria Street, 4Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 071. [Pan : Aabcp 8731 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceedings in order to correct the mistakes on account of lack of enquiry, deficiency in enquiry, total oversight or inadvertence on the part of the AO, while making the assessment sought to be reopened. 2.6. In the instant case, it is well established that both the figures of building stock as appearing at the beginning of the relevant

ASIT BARAN ROY ,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 47, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassess the case is bad in law in view of various legal pronouncement and settled principles of law. 4. FOR THAT in any event, the addition sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) of Rs 1,23,794/ on the basis of gross profit ratio on difference of stock is liable to be struck down in appeal." 3. The present appeal

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ASKA INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

159 ITR 624 as well as in R.B Bansilal ITA No. 2682/Kol/13 M/s. Aska Investments Pvt.Ltd 1 Abirchand Firm v. CIT (SC) 70 ITR 74, thereby, making the deletion of perverse, unlawful and unjustified. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Assessee is company and dealing in the business of finance, Share and Real Estate. The original assessment

SUJIT KUMAR BHAGAT,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 28(2),KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

159/-. Under scrutiny, notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) I.T.A. No. 483/KOL./2013 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 2 of 9 were served on the assessee. In compliance to those notices, the ld. A.R. of the assessee and assessee himself appeared. As per the AIR information the AO found, that the assessee invested in Mutual Funds

PANDROL RAHEE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

159 CTR (SC) 114 : (2000) 242 ITR 381 (SC), the Supreme Court observed : "It is settled law that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of, notice for reassessment under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, cannot be issued, i.e. no reassessment proceedings can be initiated so long as assessment proceedings pending on the basis of return