ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRD COMMODITIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] It(Ss)A Nos.120 To123/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2012-13

reassessment proceedings was bad in law as it did not satisfy the condition precedent in the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act. 18. We also find merit in the alternate contention made by the Ld. AR that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 31-03-2016 without first forming reasons to believe that income

SRI NEERAJ UMA SHANKAR MURARKA,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD - 35(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

133A of the I. T. Act, 1961 was conducted by Pr. Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Ahmedabad at the premise of NMCE and backup of the NMCE trade was taken. After analysis of this data, 85 entities was identified who had booked contrived losses in excess of Rs.10 Crores and information was shared with concerned Director General of Income

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

reassessment proceeding passed on the invalid\napproval.\nITA No. 2303/Kol/2024\n14. The issue raised in ground no. 1 is against the invalid proceeding u/s. 147 r.w.s. 148\nof the Act. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 30.09.2014\ndeclaring total income of Rs.11,55,77,160/-. The other facts qua this year are also

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,DELHI vs. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

reassessment proceeding passed on the invalid\napproval.\nITA No. 2303/Kol/2024\n14.\nThe issue raised in ground no. 1 is against the invalid proceeding u/s. 147 r.w.s. 148\nof the Act. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 30.09.2014\ndeclaring total income of Rs.11,55,77,160/-. The other facts qua this year are also

VRINDA ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,C.C-1(1),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 1274/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -A N D- I.T.A. Nos. 1232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107

u/s 148 for the assessment year 2012-13. 15. The ld. Assessing Officer was again satisfied with the explanation of the assessee and did not make any addition. He ITA Nos. 1274 & 1232/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd. passed the reassessment order under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income

VRINDA ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, CER-1, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 1274/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -A N D- I.T.A. Nos. 1232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107

u/s 148 for the assessment year 2012-13. 15. The ld. Assessing Officer was again satisfied with the explanation of the assessee and did not make any addition. He ITA Nos. 1274 & 1232/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd. passed the reassessment order under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income

PKC SECURITIES ,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-35(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment order be quashed. 14. For that the sanction u/s 151 of the IT Act 1961 before the reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the IT Act 1961 was mechanical and without application of proper mind and the sanction was bad in law and hence the reopening be held to be bad in law. 15. For that the facts

BHARGAB ENGINEERING WORKS,HOWRAH vs. PCIT, CENTRAL KOLKATA 2, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 dated 30.03.2023, and the expenditure claimed was required to be disallowed. Therefore, a sum of ₹ 17,03,551/- to be disallowed under section 36(1)(va) of the Act and another sum of ₹ 45,236/-, which was required to be disallowed as per Explanation 1 to sub-section (1) of section

DCIT, C.C.XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PRATAP PROPERTIES LTD., KOLKATA

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue for all the assessment years are dismissed

Bench: Hon. Sri Mahavir Singh & Hon. Sri M.Balaganesh

147 of the Act but not u/s 153A of the Act. When accepted by the AO then there is no concealment of income and consequently penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act cannot be imposed. The concealment of income is to be determined with regard to the return of income in response to notice u/s 153A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the\nCOs of the assessee are partly allowed

133A of the Act was conducted\non the premises of the assessee on 04.011.2019, during which some\ndocuments were found. Based on the findings of the survey team, the\nId. AO reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961\n(the Act) by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 01.04.2021, which\nwere duly served upon

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

section 151 of the Act and accordingly, the reassessment proceeding passed on the invalid approval are itself invalid and accordingly quashed. ITA No. 2315/Kol/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 13. We have quashed the reassessment proceeding in ITA No. 2257/Kol/2024 for AY 2012-13 which was passed on the invalid approval. In this appeal also, we apply the result

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

section 151 of the Act and accordingly, the reassessment proceeding passed on the invalid approval are itself invalid and accordingly quashed. ITA No. 2315/Kol/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 13. We have quashed the reassessment proceeding in ITA No. 2257/Kol/2024 for AY 2012-13 which was passed on the invalid approval. In this appeal also, we apply the result

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,DELHI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1)/KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

section 151 of the Act and accordingly, the reassessment proceeding passed on the invalid approval are itself invalid and accordingly quashed. ITA No. 2315/Kol/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 13. We have quashed the reassessment proceeding in ITA No. 2257/Kol/2024 for AY 2012-13 which was passed on the invalid approval. In this appeal also, we apply the result

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RUNGTA IRRIGATION LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

section 151 of the Act and accordingly, the reassessment proceeding passed on the invalid approval are itself invalid and accordingly quashed. ITA No. 2315/Kol/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 13. We have quashed the reassessment proceeding in ITA No. 2257/Kol/2024 for AY 2012-13 which was passed on the invalid approval. In this appeal also, we apply the result

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RUNGTA IRRIGATION LTD, NEW DEHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

section 151 of the Act and accordingly, the reassessment proceeding passed on the invalid approval are itself invalid and accordingly quashed. ITA No. 2315/Kol/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 13. We have quashed the reassessment proceeding in ITA No. 2257/Kol/2024 for AY 2012-13 which was passed on the invalid approval. In this appeal also, we apply the result

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, HOOGLY, HOOGHLY vs. SWAPAN KUMAR MONDAL, HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Hooghly……...……...………………...……..Appellant Swapan Kumar Mondal..…….…..…….……………………..…………………………………..……….…..Respondent Uttarayan Station Road Chinsurah R.S. Dist. Hooghly Pin – 712 102 [Pan : Aedpm 6336 A]

133A of the Act, was conducted in the premises of M/s. Mondal Construction Company Ltd., the sole proprietary concerned of the assessee, on 24/01/2008. Notice u/s 148 of the Act, was issued on 26/05/2011, reopening the assessment u/s 147. The Assessing Officer at para 3 of his order states that, the assessee has voluntarily disclosed Rs.59,99,647/- under

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

section 147 of the Act and cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT vs. CEAT Ltd. in [2023] 146 taxmann.com 108(SC) wherein it has been decided by the Hon’ble Apex court that no re-opening can be made u/s 147

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

section 147 of the Act and cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT vs. CEAT Ltd. in [2023] 146 taxmann.com 108(SC) wherein it has been decided by the Hon’ble Apex court that no re-opening can be made u/s 147