DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ALEMBIC MERCHANTS PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue fails

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Central Cir-1(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Alembic Merchants Pvt. Ltd Pan: Aacca 0918Q Appellant Respondent

147 after the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the notice u/s. 148 was served.” From the above, since the financial year in which notice u/s. 148 was served ended on 31.03.2016, the reassessment order ought to have been made by the AO till 31.12.2016 and the impugned order u/s. 147/144 being passed

DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S DOTEX MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objections are also dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

1) of the IT Act. However, notice was issued under section 148 of the Act subsequently, on the information received from the Director of IT (Inv.), New Delhi, to the effect that the assessee had accepted the accommodation entries from M/s. I.G. Properties (P.) Ltd., M/s. Parivartan Capital & Financial Services (P.) Ltd. and from M/s. Victoria

I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

u/s. 14393) by the AO on 28.12.2018 13. Before we controvert to the legal issue held in favour of the assessee by the Ld. CIT(A), let us look into section 153 which reads as under: “Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment and recomputation 153. (1) No order of assessment shall be made under section 143 or section 144

M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD.,SILIGURI vs. PCIT-1, , KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

u/s. 14393) by the AO on 28.12.2018 13. Before we controvert to the legal issue held in favour of the assessee by the Ld. CIT(A), let us look into section 153 which reads as under: “Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment and recomputation 153. (1) No order of assessment shall be made under section 143 or section 144

M/S VENKATESWAR MEDICARE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

144 of the Act dated 17.12.2018 is void ,ultra vires and nullity in the eyes of law as the Venkateswar Medicare Pvt. Ltd. AYs 2014-15 & 2016-17 same was passed by the Assistant Co same was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle mmissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Jalpaiguri whereas as per the CBDT circular

M/S VENKATESWAR MEDICARE PVT. LTD.,ITO, WARD-2(1) vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

144 of the Act dated 17.12.2018 is void ,ultra vires and nullity in the eyes of law as the Venkateswar Medicare Pvt. Ltd. AYs 2014-15 & 2016-17 same was passed by the Assistant Co same was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle mmissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Jalpaiguri whereas as per the CBDT circular

M/S. AJANTA MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

1) of the Act in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2017 and thus proceeded to frame the assessment u/s 144 of the act. Finally the assessment was completed vide order dated 26.12.2017 passed u/s 147 read with 144 of the Act. 12. Aggrieved by the order of AO the assessee challenged the order on legal issue

M/S. AJANTA MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

1) of the Act in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2017 and thus proceeded to frame the assessment u/s 144 of the act. Finally the assessment was completed vide order dated 26.12.2017 passed u/s 147 read with 144 of the Act. 12. Aggrieved by the order of AO the assessee challenged the order on legal issue

M/S. AJANTA MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

1) of the Act in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2017 and thus proceeded to frame the assessment u/s 144 of the act. Finally the assessment was completed vide order dated 26.12.2017 passed u/s 147 read with 144 of the Act. 12. Aggrieved by the order of AO the assessee challenged the order on legal issue

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

147 read with Section 144B and not under Section 144 of the Act. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by passing the order on 07/01/2025 at 11:26 IST, prior to the expiry of the 3 stipulated time period provided in the notice for submissions, thereby violating the principles

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

147 read with Section 144B and not under Section 144 of the Act. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by passing the order on 07/01/2025 at 11:26 IST, prior to the expiry of the 3 stipulated time period provided in the notice for submissions, thereby violating the principles

M/S. EMTA COAL LTD.,( ERSTWHILE KNOWN AS M/S. EASTERN MINERAL & TRADING AGENCY ) ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(1) , KOLAKTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Emta Coal Ltd…………………………………………..............................…….............Appellant 5B, Nandlal Basu Sarani Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aacce 3506 G]

144 of the Act for non-compliance by the company vide assessment order dated 29.12.2017. The the company vide assessment order dated 29.12.2017. The order u/s 144/147 of the Act was order u/s 144/147 of the Act was passed in the name of the company, under the PAN No. of the company by making addition on the company, under

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]

reassessment order u/s. 144 read with section 147 of the Act dated 27.12.1970 itself suffered from the fundamental infirmity and jurisdiction defect thereby rendering all the consequential action and proceeding including revisionary order u/s. 263 as nonest in the eyes of law. The Ld. AR submitted that in an appeal against the order of 263 of the Act which ceased

MANAKSIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1), , KOLKATA

144. Clause (b) of Section 158 BC by referring to Section 143(2) and (3)\nwould appear to imply that the provisions of Section 143(1) are excluded. But Section\n143(2) itself becomes necessary only where it becomes necessary to check the return,\nso that where block return conforms to the undisclosed income inferred by the\nauthorities, there

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

1) of the Act. Thereafter, the case was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act as the Assessing Officer received information from the assessee itself that due to oversight, an amount of Rs.35,645/- towards profit on share dealing was not considered as income. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, reopened the assessment by serving notice u/s

ZULU MERCHANDISE (P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT 2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

1) of the Act was framed, i.e. 18.06.2013 and the limitation period expired on 31.03.2016, whereas the ld. PCIT has set aside and revised the assessment order as framed u/s section 144 read with section 147 of the Act dated 29.09.2021 and consequently the revisionary jurisdiction of the ld. PCIT cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee finds force

GANAPATI DEVELOPERS ,HOWRAH vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-47, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Madhumita Roy)

1) was issued. Thus fulfillment of the conditions of section 147, including the one that there should be "reasons to believe" is essential for the validity of the notice under section 148." 8 I.T.A. No. 139/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ganapati Developers. 3. On the facts as enumerated herein above we submit that the notice under section 148 has been

ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

144 of the Act after issuance of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act. This is very clearly provided in the scheme of the Act. Admittedly, the impugned reassessment has been framed by the ld AO u/s 143(3) of the Act. We also hold that shelter u/s 292BB of the Act cannot be taken by the revenue for jurisdictional

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

144 of the Act after issuance of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act. This is very clearly provided in the scheme of the Act. Admittedly, the impugned reassessment has been framed by the ld AO u/s 143(3) of the Act. We also hold that shelter u/s 292BB of the Act cannot be taken by the revenue for jurisdictional