NEZONE TUBES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

2. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by setting aside the assessment to the Learned Assessing Officer for fresh assessment under the powers of Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of an order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B and not under Section

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)

2 & 3 above, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to dispose the objection so filed by the appellant for reopening the impugned proceedings and the consequential order so passed u/s 147/143(3) is bad in law and it may be held accordingly. 5. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming

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

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

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

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

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

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

2), Kolkata” 3 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Arpan Securities Pvt. Limited 5. The ld. Commissioner took cognizance under section 263 of the Income Tax Act on the ground that in the reasons, ld. Assessing Officer has worked out the income escaped from assessment at Rs.43,56,00,000/-, whereas he did not enquire this issue in the reassessment proceedings

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

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOUTHWINDS PROJECT LLP, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

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

2). The assessment order has been passed in violation of mandatory provisions of law and is liable be quashed as illegal and not sustainable. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition made in an illegal order. 3. Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding validity of reassessment order without appreciating that the notice issued by AO u/s 148 is illegal

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

2 of the assessment order and it was also mentioned that the case was reopened on 26.03.2021 and the proceeding was stated to be time barred. 6. The Ld. DR countered the issue of the notice being time-barred by stating that during the COVID period on account of Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions

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)

2 M/s Abhishek Dealtrade Private Limited “6.0 Upon considering the facts of the case and the written submissions it is noted that the reassessment order was passed in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. The AO failed to provide the reasons recorded for reopening or the material relied upon, despite the assessee's repeated requests. This omission deprived

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]

2) and 142(1) were issued to the assessee in timely manner. In response to the same, the assessee had filed its submissions. The said submissions were perused by the AO and the case was heard. Later, the AO had passed the asst. order on 31.12.2017 by determining total income of the assessee at Rs.9,64,54,341/-. On perusal

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

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