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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

234\n214,695,681\nSCHEDULE \"D\" Unsecured Loan\nPARTICULARS\nAs At 31st\nMarch-11\nAs At 31st\nMarch-10\n₹\n₹\nFrom Companies\n50,000,000\n10,000,000\nInterest Accrued & due thereon\n3,277,477\n1,080,000\nTotal\n53,277,477\n11,080,000\n4. Ld.AR further drew our attention to page No.37 of the paper book which

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

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 of Rs. 53,00,280/- and raising demand of Rs. 31,60,860/-. Later, verification of the record revealed that at the time of computation interest

SUSHIL MITRUKA,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

reassessment made by the ld. AO by ignoring the fact that the objection filed by the assessee to the reopening of assessment were not disposed off as per the procedural laid down in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC). 3.1. The facts of the case have been discussed while dealing

SUSHIL MITRUKA,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals\nof the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita Nos.2178, 1630 & 1631/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17)\Nsushil Mitruka\Ng208, City Centre, Office Block,\Np.O. Matigara, Siliguri,\Ndarjeeling, Siliguri-734010,\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Ndcit, Circle 1,\Naaykar Bhawan, Matigara,\Nsiliguri-734004,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Accpa9340F\Nita No. 1613/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2017-18)\Ndcit, Circle 1,\Naaykar Bhawan, Matigara,\Nsiliguri-734004,\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Nsushil Mitruka\Ng208, City Centre, Office Block,\Np.O. Matigara, Siliguri,\Ndarjeeling, Siliguri-734010,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Nassessee By\Nshri Sk Tulsian, Ar\Nrevenue By\Nshri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr\Ndate Of Hearing:\N03.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement:\N18.12.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\Nthese Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & Revenue Against\Nthe Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter\Nreferred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.08.2025, 27.05.2025 For A.Y.\N2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since The Appeals Are Relating\Nto Same Assessee & Involves Commons Issues, Therefore All These\Nappeals Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity.\Npage 2\Nita Nos.2178,1630,1630 & 1631/Kol/2025\Nsushil Mitruka; Ays 2014-15, 15-16, 16-17 & 17-18\Nfirst Of All We Shall Take Ita No. 2178/Kol/2025 A.Y. 214-15 For\Nadjudication.\Nα.Υ. 2014-15\Nita No. 2178/Kol/2025\N2.\Nthe Issue Raised In Ground No.1 Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A)\Nupholding The Reopening Of Assessment, Which Was Based Upon\Nborrowed Satisfaction Without Examining The Records & Without\Napplication Of Mind & Accordingly, The Reopening Of Assessment Bas\Nbad In Law.\N2.

reassessment made by the Ld. AO by ignoring the\nfact that the objection filed by the assessee to the reopening of\nassessment were not disposed off as per the procedural laid down in\nthe case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003]\n259 ITR 19 (SC).\n3. 1. The facts of the case have been discussed while

SUSHIL MITRUKA,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

reassessment made by the ld. AO by ignoring the fact that the objection filed by the assessee to the reopening of assessment were not disposed off as per the procedural laid down in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC). 3.1. The facts of the case have been discussed while dealing

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI vs. SUSHIL MITRUKA, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

reassessment made by the ld. AO by ignoring the fact that the objection filed by the assessee to the reopening of assessment were not disposed off as per the procedural laid down in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC). 3.1. The facts of the case have been discussed while dealing

BRINDA DAGA,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 143(2) of the\nAct, shall henceforth, be issued in these revised formats only. The Systems Directorate\nis effecting necessary changes in the 1TBA module in this regard\". This simply means\nthat all notices u/s 143(2) henceforth, shall be issued online in the revised formats subject\nto the Directorate of Systems of the CBDT updating the said revised

KAMLESH SINGH,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O. WARD-4(30, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 143(2) of the\nAct, shall henceforth, be issued in these revised formats only. The Systems Directorate\nis effecting necessary changes in the 1TBA module in this regard\". This simply means\nthat all notices u/s 143(2) henceforth, shall be issued online in the revised formats subject\nto the Directorate of Systems of the CBDT updating the said revised

MAN MOHAN GOENKA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 43(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 143(2) of the\nAct, shall henceforth, be issued in these revised formats only. The Systems Directorate\nis effecting necessary changes in the 1TBA module in this regard\". This simply means\nthat all notices u/s 143(2) henceforth, shall be issued online in the revised formats subject\nto the Directorate of Systems of the CBDT updating the said revised

M/S. DHANBAD MINERALS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 6(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 143(2) of the\nAct, shall henceforth, be issued in these revised formats only. The Systems Directorate\nis effecting necessary changes in the ITBA module in this regard\". This simply means\nthat all notices u/s 143(2) henceforth, shall be issued online in the revised formats subject\nto the Directorate of Systems of the CBDT updating the said revised

MCNALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Ecospace, Campus 2B, 11F/12 Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, (Old Plot No. Aa Ii/Blk 3), Chowringhee Square, Vs New Town, Rajarhat, Kolkata - 700069 North 24 Paragans, Kolkata - 7000156 (Pan: Aaccs5491A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Abhishek Sureka, Ar Respondent By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, Dr Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.10.2024 O R D E R Per Rakesh Mishra: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-I, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld. Cit”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Ays 2009-10 & 2013- 14, Dated 28.02.2018 & 13.03.2018 Respectively. Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of Vide This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience. Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Limited.: Ays: 2009-10 & 2013-14 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

234,158/- as per the normal provisions of the Act and claiming a refund of Rs.1,647/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 on 29.12.2011 at the total income of Rs.20,48,40,900/-. The case was further considered for initiation of proceeding

MCNALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Ecospace, Campus 2B, 11F/12 Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, (Old Plot No. Aa Ii/Blk 3), Chowringhee Square, Vs New Town, Rajarhat, Kolkata - 700069 North 24 Paragans, Kolkata - 7000156 (Pan: Aaccs5491A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Abhishek Sureka, Ar Respondent By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, Dr Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.10.2024 O R D E R Per Rakesh Mishra: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-I, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld. Cit”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Ays 2009-10 & 2013- 14, Dated 28.02.2018 & 13.03.2018 Respectively. Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of Vide This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience. Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Limited.: Ays: 2009-10 & 2013-14 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

234,158/- as per the normal provisions of the Act and claiming a refund of Rs.1,647/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 on 29.12.2011 at the total income of Rs.20,48,40,900/-. The case was further considered for initiation of proceeding

NEHA DIWAN,HINDMOTOR vs. ITO WARD - 23(1), HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment was initiated based on alleged information that the appellant received accommodation entries of ₹91,00,000 from M/s Shree Shyam Trading Company (Prop. Satya Narayan More, PAN: CRHPM0358P). The appellant submitted complete documentation including ledger, sale invoices, confirmations, and bank statements to prove the genuineness of the transactions. 4. That, without prejudice, the assessment order dated 31st March

BHOOTNATH VINTRADE PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-12(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

234 A/B/C/D of the IT act 1961 is over charged and wrongly calculated and or is not applicable to the assessee case hence the interest be deleted and or correctly computed. 15. The appellant craves leave to press new, additional grounds of appeal or modify, withdraw any of the above grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal

SUNITA CHANANI ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-36(2), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

reassessment order be quashed. 9. For that the sanction u/s 151 of the IT Act 1961 before the reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the IT Act 1961 was mechanical and without application of proper mind and the sanction was bad in law and hence the reopening be held to be bad in law. 10. For that the learned

SUNITA CHANANI ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-36(2), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

reassessment order be quashed. 9. For that the sanction u/s 151 of the IT Act 1961 before the reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the IT Act 1961 was mechanical and without application of proper mind and the sanction was bad in law and hence the reopening be held to be bad in law. 10. For that the learned

DHAR & COMPANY PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

reassessment proceedings\nrelated to A.Y. 2011-12. It was also stated in the assessment order\npassed u/s 143(3) of the Act by ITO, Ward 3(3), Kolkata on\n17.12.2018 that the old management appointed a consultant, who\nfiled the appeal before the Ld. CIT (A) alongwith written submission\nwith digital signature of Mr. Tamal Pal (new Management) were filed

M/S. ROSEWOOD MERCANTILE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

reassessment proceedings, the ld. AO issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to the 9 out of 20 subscribers and completed the assessment vide order dated 30.04.2012. According to the PCIT, notices u/s 133(6) of the Act were not served through postal services. In reply to notices u/s 133(6) of the Act, all replies were received

M/S. ROSEWOOD MERCANTILE PVT. LTD..,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

reassessment proceedings, the ld. AO issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to the 9 out of 20 subscribers and completed the assessment vide order dated 30.04.2012. According to the PCIT, notices u/s 133(6) of the Act were not served through postal services. In reply to notices u/s 133(6) of the Act, all replies were received