ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S BPO FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.99/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata……..........................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Bpo Finance & Investments Pvt. Ltd. .……........……..…..…..Respondent R No.54,5/1, Clive Row (2Nd Floor), Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aaccb5328F] Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 15, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 04, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 10.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Revenue Originally Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld, Cit(A) Was Justified In The Quashing The Addition Of Rs. 1,85,000,00/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Share Capital & Premium In The Course Assessment In Absence Of Identity Of The Creditors, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Entire Transactions. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld, Cit(A) Was Justified In The Quashing The Addition Of Rs. 1,85,00,000/-Made By The Assessing Officer Where No Personal Attendance Was Made By Any Director Of The Share Allottee Companies During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings & As Such Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Creditors & Genuineness Of Transactions Could Not Be Verified.

Section 127 transferring the case, reassessment notice issued by A.O. at Delhi and all subsequent proceedings based on said notice are without jurisdiction. In the case of Gaurav Joshi vs. ITO (2019) 197 TTJ 946(Asr.)(Trib.), it was held that the assessment framed by A.O had not issued notice u/s 148 of the Act is void-ab-initio

RISING RETAILS(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

section 143(2) of the Act during the reassessment proceedings.” 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the Ld. AO found that the assessee has debited an amount of Rs.24,01,69,671/- towards contract expense which include an amount of Rs.24,00,84,000/- paid to M/s. Sarda Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. The A.O. issued letter

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

NAVANSH VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceedings for reopening the case U/S 147/148 of the Act which was disposed off vide letter dtd. 06112/2019. Another notice U/S 142(1) of the Act issued on 06.12.2019 in terms of section 129 of the Act. But assessee, not filed any documents as requisitioned uls 142(1) of the Act on 06.12.2019 on the date fixed for furnishing

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AMICUS HEALTHCARE SERVICES & SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. , KOLKATA

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

1. The CIT(A) has erred in invalidating the reassessment order dated 01.11.2018 without adjudicating the issue of the case ignoring the fact that the assessee failed to file ITR in response to notice u/s 148 in time. 3 M/s Amicus Healthcare Services & Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 2. The CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that the assessee failed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC - 3(3),, KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

MANISH PARASRAMPURIA,KOLKATA vs. A.O., NFAC / D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-43, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

1, 2 and 3 stated above. 4.7. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the subject matter of reason to believe recorded at by the Ld. 9 Manish Parasrampuria AY 2015-16 AO for invoking the provisions of section 148 read with section 147 of the Act have already been elaborately and exhaustively dealt with

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

197(9) of the Companies Act, 2013 after affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR for the assessee vehemently submitted that the jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act has been assumed invalidly by Ld. Pr. CIT as the necessary pre-conditions for exercising his jurisdiction was not satisfied. The ld. AR submitted that the assessment framed

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

WESTERN COMMERCIAL CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. PCIT - 9, KOLKATA, AAYKAR BHAVAN DAKSHIN

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceedings, the AO disregarded our submissions and passed an order based solely on findings of the Ld. PCIT under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 on 31st March 2025. In this order, the AO made an unwarranted addition by arbitrarily applying a predetermined percentage to a purported figure of suppressed sales to arrive at the assessed loss. This

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA vs. ALCOM INVESTMENT PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

reassessment has to be based on fulfillment of certain preconditions and if the concept of 'change of opinion' is removed as contended on behalf of the department, then in the garb of reopening the assessment, review would take place. One must treat the concept of 'change of opinion' as an in-built test to check abuse of power

D.C.I.T., CC - 3(1),, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and\nappeals of the revenue are dismissed

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\nFacts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3.1, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision