M/S. AASTHA VINCOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-XIX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

35D of the Act and accordingly Rs.16,200/- was disallowed in the assessment framed under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act dated 28.02.2011. 5. Subsequently ld. Principal CIT-1, Kolkata, uon perusing the assessment records in respect of assessment framed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act dated 28.02.2011, observed that

ITO, WD-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GLOBSYN TECHNOLOGIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

section 35D of Income Tax Act. (ii) Portal website development expenses: - The company had incurred the aforesaid cost in earlier years. This sum was spent on development and commissioning of its educational & training portal, which is generating revenue to the company. The said cost is treated as deferred development cost to be written off over a period of 10 years

ITO, WD-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GLOBSYN TECHNOLOGIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

section 35D of Income Tax Act. (ii) Portal website development expenses: - The company had incurred the aforesaid cost in earlier years. This sum was spent on development and commissioning of its educational & training portal, which is generating revenue to the company. The said cost is treated as deferred development cost to be written off over a period of 10 years

ITO, WD-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GLOBSYN TECHNOLOGIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

section 35D of Income Tax Act. (ii) Portal website development expenses: - The company had incurred the aforesaid cost in earlier years. This sum was spent on development and commissioning of its educational & training portal, which is generating revenue to the company. The said cost is treated as deferred development cost to be written off over a period of 10 years

RAMESHWAR FINVEST PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Central Circle 3(3) Rameshwar Finvest Private Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, Limited Santil Palli, 110, Eastern 111, Park Street, Kolkata- Metropolitan Bypass, Opposite Vs. 700016, West Bengal Ruby, Kasba, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcr1053N Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Puja Somani, Ars Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.12.2025

reassessment was done by the ld. AO on the ground that consultancy fee of ₹ 1,05,500/- was not included in the return of income and thus has escaped assessment. The ld AR submitted that, however, the ld. AO by applying the explanation 3 to Section 147 of the Act called upon the assessee to explain the share capital/ share