THE UNITED PROVINCES SUGAR COMPANY LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings the ITO made addition to the assessee's income to the extent of Rs. 2,45,000 on account of addition to the assessee's income to the extent of Rs. 2,45,000 on account of addition to the assessee's income to the extent of Rs. 2,45,000 on account of ostensible transactions in hundi

M/S KOLKATA WEST INTERNATIONAL CITY PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal]

reassess the income of the assessee vide order dated 13.03.2014 passed u/s. 263 of the Act, which is as under: 3 M/s. Kolkata West International City Pvt. Ltd., AY 2009-10 6. Consequent to the order passed u/s. 263 of the Act the assessee filed appeal before ITAT vide ITA No. 1094/Kol/2014. In the meantime, the AO framed consequential assessment

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

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

ACIT, CIRCLE - 56, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THE WEST BENGAL STATE CO-OPT. BANK LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals as well as the cross-objections are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.Anos.737-742/Kol/2011 Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 2001-02 A.C.I.T., Circle-56, -Vs.- The West Bengal State Co-Operative Kolkata Bank Ltd.Kolkata [Pan : Aaaat 7072 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) C.O.Nos.36-40/Kol/2011 (A/O I.T.A Nos. 737-741/Kol/2011 ) Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 2000-2001 The West Bengal State Co-Operative -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-56, Bank Ltd., Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaat 7072 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri N.C.Mondal, Ca Date Of Hearing : 27.07.2016. Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2016. Order Per Bench

251 ITR 522 (SC) "Held, (i) that the assessee was entitled to deduction u/s. 8P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the interest earned from funds utilised for the statutory reserves. (ii) That provision of safe deposit vaults was part of the ordinary banking business of a bank as shown by section

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

SUGOTA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

2 I.T.A. No. 1459/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sugota Industries Pvt. Ltd. 4. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nirbheram Daluram (224 ITR 610) for the propositions that powers of the ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with that of the ITO as held

MANJIT MANAGEMENT SERVICES (P) LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 9(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2667/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Manjit Management Services Pvt. Ltd………………....………………..……………..……….….Appellant Plot No. 258/B Block-B Bangue Avenue Kolkata-700 055 [Pan : Aaecm 4773 D] Income Tax Officer, Ward – 9(1), Kolkata…….......................................................…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Haldar, Jcit, Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

2 I.T.A. No. 2667/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Manjit Management Services Pvt. Ltd received towards share capital along with share premium, as unexplained cash credit. 3. Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before me. 4. The only contention raised by the assessee is that the enhancement made by the ld. CIT(A) is beyond his jurisdiction as he sought

JESSOP & CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-1, KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 702/kol/14 is allowed for statistical purpose, while ITA

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 702 & 1045/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S. Jessop & Co.. Ltd. -Vs.- C.I.T., Kolkata-1, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaacj 6969 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr)

251 ITR 785 (Raj). 10. Without prejudice to the aforesaid submissions it was further submitted that the CIT has exercised jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act on the reasoning that the AO did not make adequate enquiries on the computation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. He further brought to our notice that a query was raised

I.T.O WD - 2(2),DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. SATYAPRIYA JOARDAR, DURGAPUR

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

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, A.M. & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M.)

2) and 142(1) were issued and in response to which the assessee appeared before the AO, produced documents in support of his payments relating to PF and service tax. During the course of assessment, the AO found that the assessee debited various expenses from his P&L a/c. and the same were not verifiable from the cash book

RADIX TIE-UP PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-11(2), KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Sri S. S. Godara] आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.2404/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Radix Tie-Up Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-11(2), Kolkata 184/A, Regent Colony, Tollygunge, Kolkata – 700001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecr1237M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 4, Kolkata’S Order Dated 10.05.2019 Passed In Case No.791/Cit(A)-4/16-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. For The Reasons Stated In Assessee’S Condonation Petition Dated 27.01.20 Explaining Five Days’ Delay To Be Attributable To Various Procedural Aspects & Compilation Of Necessary Records & On Account Of No Objection From The Revenue Side, I Condone The Impugned Delay Of Five Days In Filing Of The Instant Appeal & Proceed To Adjudicate The Same On Merits.

reassessment or recomputation to be made in pursuance of the notice is to be made on him as the agent of such non-resident, the notice shall not be issued after the expiry of a period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. I.T.A No.2404/Kol/2019 Radix Tie-up Pvt. Ltd. 8. Sri Nikhil Agrawal, learned counsel