OPLUS STEEL AND POWER PVT. LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS SWATI CONCAST AND POWER PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from

PROVASH ADHIKARI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 46(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment by passing an order u/s. 147/143(3) by making an addition of Rs. 93,57,008/- on account of alleged unexplained cash credit.” 2.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who observed that 5 notices issued at the e-mail addresses i.e. (i) A.PROVASH@GMAIL.COM and (ii) saassociates.adv@gmail.com, which were available

M/S. VICTOR COMMERCIAL CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Victor Commercial Co. Acit, Central Circle-1(2), Ltd., Kolkata, C/O. M/S Salarpuria Jajodia & Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, Vs Co., 7, C.R., Avenue, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Kolkata - 700072 Bypass, Kolkata - 700017 (Pan: Aabcv0011C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceedings were completed vide order u/s 147/143(3) wherein certain adjustment/additions/disallowances were made and the income was assessed at Rs.20,35,380/- as against the returned income of Rs. 14,30,900/-. The assessee had claimed credit for TDS of Rs. 16,20,135/- M/s Victor Commercial Co. Ltd. : AYs: 2009-10 and 2010-11 in its return

SHRI NITYANAND PANDEY,HOOGHLY vs. I.T.O., WARD - 23(1),, HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from

DIAMOND TRADECOM PRIVATE LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from

ARPAN SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 152/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Arpan Securities Pvt. Limited,................Appellant 14C, M.D. Road, 4Th Floor, Kolkata-700007 [Pan: Aajca9130H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,..............................Respondent Ward-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

reassessment order dated 27.11.2019 passed under section 144 read with section 147 is also pending. Therefore, there should not be any 263 proceeding in the case of the assessee. 4 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Arpan Securities Pvt. Limited 8. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-clause (c) of section 263(1) puts

SUSANTA MALLICK,KALIKAPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1),, KOLKATA

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

reassessment was completed on a total income of Rs.90.39 lakhs (including an addition of Rs. 68.64 lakhs on account of bogus claim of LTCG plus Rs.3.43 lakhs being the alleged commission @ 5%, paid to brokers ( entry providers ) . 5) The matter carried in appeal, has been dismissed by the Ld first appellate authority, in absence of any representation or any response

M/S FANTASTIC FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

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

section 251 of the Act applicable w.e.f. 01/10/2024, I hereby set aside the impugned assessment order dated 12.05.2023 passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act to the file of the AO for fresh assessment after affording reasonable opportunities to the appellant and diligently adhering to the principle of natural justice. The appellant is directed to comply with notices issued

JIYA EXIM PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 5(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

251/-U/s 143(1)\nNo\n10\nWhether the provision of section 150(1) are applicable.\nIf the answer is in the affirmative, the relevant facts\nmay be stated against item no.11 may also be brought\nout that the provision of section 150(2) would not\nstand in the way of initiating Proceedings u/s.147.\nNo\n11\nReasons for the belief that

ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROF INCOMETAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2),KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. M/S. ANUBANDH FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who, vide order dated 03.07.2024, deleted the additions made u/s 68 I.T.A. No.: 2390/KOL/2024 C.O. No.: 5/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Anubandh Financial Services Private Limited. of the Act and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the order

M/S. ABHEEK DEALTRADE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 4(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings were initiated based on the assumption that the assessee received Rs. 9,88,000/- from CMFPL, an assertion for which evidence should have been collected and verified. 6.3 Further the AO did not address the assessee's objections or provide a speaking order disposing of those objections, as required under the guidelines established in GKN Driveshafts (India

SMT. SNEHA BRAHMA, LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF LATE SHYAMAL KUMAR BRAHMA,RAIGANJ vs. ITO, WARD 2(4), , RAIGANJ

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessing the income was existing and on account of the limitation expiring on 31.03.2020, the limitation for issuing the notice u/s 148 of the Act was extended up to 30.06.2021 by TOLA. Hence, the challenge for the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act is not correct and this ground of appeal is dismissed. However, since the assessee could

ACIT(IN-SITU), WARD-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRIYASH VYAPAAR PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 702/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (In-Situ),………………………………………...……Appellant Ward-8(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, Room No. 13A, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- Sriyash Vyapaar Private Limited,……..…..Respondent 1002, Poddar Point, 113, Park Street, Kolkata-700016 [Pan:Aaecb3585G] Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 24, 2025 O R D E R

Reassessment Notice”. In this case, credible information received from ADIT/DDIT(Inv.), Unit-3(4), Kolkata, which has been received through mail from Other Agency i.e. Special Commissioner of Revenue, Bureau of Investigation, Unit-1, Kolkata, South Bengal and Nodal Officer. During the assessment proceedings, notices u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire dated -03.01.23, 31.03.23 and 11.04.23 which were duly served

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

SUGGEST VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. ITO -5(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment order passed by AO is ab initio void and liable to be quashed inasmuch as same has been passed without providing copy of reasons recorded for reopening. 5. The appellant reserves the right to amend, modify or add any of the ground/s of appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company

RAJIB DUTTA GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 62(4),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

sections 250(1) and 251(1) that the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act. Since there was no proper compliance before both the Ld. AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A), in the interest of justice and fair play it was considered

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DHANSAR ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

251 of the Act on 18.04.2017 by deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. Further search and seizure operation was conducted u/s 132 of the Act on 13.01.2016 and consequent to search operation, notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 18.05.2017. On perusal of the facts of the case, there

PRESTAR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT 5(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment order was made ex parte and before the Ld. CIT(A) as well proper representation was not made and the delay in filing the appeal which was of 251 days was not condoned by the Ld. CIT(A). In the affidavit filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, it is stated that the delay