ITO, WARD-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S DANIEL COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata………..…….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd…..........…..........................…..…..... Respondent 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 1. [Pan: Aaccd9344F] C.O. 4/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd…………….....................…..…..... Cross-Objector 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 1. [Pan: Aaccd9344F] Vs Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata …………….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024

154. The bench minutely analysed law in this regard and applying the principle of 'coram non judice' and following aforesaid judgments of the supreme court, it was held that if an assessee seeks to challenge the reassessment proceedings as being without jurisdiction, when action for rectification is sought to be taken on the assumption of the validity of the reassessment

SRI GOPINATH GHORAI,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-27, HALDIA, HALDIA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Sri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A No. 01/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2005-06

154 does not arise, since there is no mistake in the order which require rectification. The third argument of the appellant's authorized representative was that the order passed u/s 143(3) dated 18/12/2007 got merged with the order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 dated 24/12/2010 by the theory of doctrine of merger and the time limit

MADHUBAN DEALERS PVT. LTD. PRESENTLY KNOWN AS MADHUBAN DEALERS LLP,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-13, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

rectification order u/s 154 of the Act dated 10.04.2019 (although the same is neither served upon the assessee nor is available on the IT portal). If that be so, then the assessment order u/s 144/147 of the Act dated 27.12.2017 stood merged with the order u/s 154 of the Act dated 10.04.2019. In that view

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KKALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.452/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata Vs Kkalpana Industries India Ltd. 2B, Pretoria Street, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aabck 2239 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 13.11.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070338584(1), For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Ms. Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. A Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Find That The Appeal Of The Revenue Has Been Filed Belatedly By 28 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Thus, The Delay Of 28 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

reassessment is different from the power of review. Here, your kind attention is drawn to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs ITO [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) wherein what constitutes disclosure of primary facts was discussed and it was held that, 17 "There can be no doubt that

ITO, WD.9(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S MAHARAJ VINCOM PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata……………….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…..…..... Respondent 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] C.O. No.6/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…....... Cross-Objector 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] Vs Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata …………..….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 07, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: This Appeal By The Revenue & Corresponding Cross-Objection By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated 08.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

154. The bench minutely analysed law in this regard and applying the principle of 'coram non judice' and following aforesaid judgments of the supreme court, it was held that if an assessee seeks to challenge the reassessment proceedings as being without jurisdiction, when action for rectification is sought to be taken on the assumption of the validity of the reassessment

SHRI JNANENDRA NATH BANERJEE,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-24(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

147 of the Act and prayed for dropping of section 154 proceedings. 3 Jnanendra Nath Banerjee., AY 2005-06 3.4. The ld AO vide letter dated 6.9.2012 informed the assessee that it was not his intention to launch any investigation into facts or to call for any evidence. It was stated that the assessee had not deposited the unused amount

R S ISPAT LIMITED,SALT LAKE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 12(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

rectification application u/s 154 of the Act wherein it was inter alia pointed out that, the reasons for which the assessment was reopened viz., unexplained purchases of Rs.3,46,77,884/- had already been added back in the original assessment u/s 143(3) and therefore the addition made in the impugned reassessment order u/s 147

ACS TRADERS (P) LTD.,HOWRAH vs. PCIT-5, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

154 of the Act (rectification of mistake) on 06.04.2016. Thereafter the assessee’s case was reopened by the AO u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 28.03.2017 by recording reasons on that date which fact is noticed from the order sheet placed at page 100 of PB. It is noted that

ICI INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

u/s. 143(2). 3. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed while the revenue’s appeal is dismissed.” We understand from the aforesaid discussion that the issue of notice for rectification and passing of orders under section 154 to rectify the intimation and to make additions and disallowances to the income indicated therein has been agitated

ACIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

u/s. 143(2). 3. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed while the revenue’s appeal is dismissed.” We understand from the aforesaid discussion that the issue of notice for rectification and passing of orders under section 154 to rectify the intimation and to make additions and disallowances to the income indicated therein has been agitated

DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

u/s. 143(2). 3. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed while the revenue’s appeal is dismissed.” We understand from the aforesaid discussion that the issue of notice for rectification and passing of orders under section 154 to rectify the intimation and to make additions and disallowances to the income indicated therein has been agitated

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. CONSOLIDATED FIBRES & CHEMICALS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

147 of the Act on 18.2.2003 determining net loss at Rs. 4,25,14,480/-. Before the reassessment proceedings, the Learned AO issued notice u/s 154 of the Act dated 20.12.2001 proposing to rectify the non-inclusion of interest income of Rs. 38,43,000/-. The assessee duly responded to the said proceeding by giving a reply

INLAND VIKASH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 900/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2004-05 A.C.I.T., Central Circle-Iv, -Vs.- M/S. Inland Vikash Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaci 6960 N) (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 565/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/S Inland Vikash Ltd. -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Central Circle-Iv, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaci 6960 N) (Respondent) (Appellant)

rectification u/s 154 of the Act on the ground that the assessee declared a sum of Rs.2,48,95,473/- as receipt against booking and collection but as per TDS certificate the said collection was Rs.3,53,36,714/-. The difference is required to be clarified. However, on 13.06.2008 the AO dropped the proceedings u/s 154

ACIT, CC-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INLAND VIKASH LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 900/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2004-05 A.C.I.T., Central Circle-Iv, -Vs.- M/S. Inland Vikash Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaci 6960 N) (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 565/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/S Inland Vikash Ltd. -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Central Circle-Iv, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaci 6960 N) (Respondent) (Appellant)

rectification u/s 154 of the Act on the ground that the assessee declared a sum of Rs.2,48,95,473/- as receipt against booking and collection but as per TDS certificate the said collection was Rs.3,53,36,714/-. The difference is required to be clarified. However, on 13.06.2008 the AO dropped the proceedings u/s 154

DAULAL KOTHARI,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1065/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Daulal Kothari -Vs- Dcit, Circle-44, Kolkata [Pan: Aiypk 2894 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

147 of the Act and the reassessment was completed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act on 04.03.2015 determining the total income at Rs. 74,29,230/- . In the re assessment, a sum of Rs. 9,94,152/- was added by the ld. AO towards long term capital gain. Brief facts of this addition is that the assessee sold

M/S. ASIATIC OXYGEN LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1381/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Asiatic Oxygen Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata. [Pan: Aacca 6748 G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

154 of the Act for which assessee gave a detailed reply and both the ld. AR as well as ld. DR before us failed to bring evidence on record to prove the status of completion of such rectification proceedings. Be that as it may, the ld. AO had sought to reopen the assessment for adjudicating the same issue towards notional

GOBINDA ADHIKARY,KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL vs. WARD 34(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, i.e. the addition made u/s 69A of the Act and since the grounds of appeal did not relate to the impugned order being the order u/s 154 of the Act, the assessee was required to take the ground relating to rate of tax computed u/s 115BBE

ACIT, CIRCLE-43, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHREE HANUMAN IRON WORKS, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 alleging that reasons recorded by the AO for reopening was not correct. But on prima facie examination of the books of A/c. and P&L A/c it was apparent that AO was correct in drawing satisfaction note at the time of initiation of proceedings u/s. 147.” 3. For adjudicating this legal issue first