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

DEBABRATA BANERJEE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-34,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

144B, which is different from the proceedings u/s 143(3). xi. For this case Appellant Assessee has not provided any documents, bills, transportation details etc. xii. Appellant Assessee in its submissions in Para 3 on page 13 states" Without prejudice, in this case the Notice u/s 148 has been issued by Ld. DCIT, Circle 34, Kolkata on 31st March

ALBATROSS INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Albatross Investment Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward 3(1) 1, 7Th Floor, Room No.707, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7 British Indian Street, Chworinghee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacca6069N Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.12.2025

reassessment in this case has been done by the National Faceless Assessment Centre and order has been passed on 22.09.2021 which is the subject matter of present appeal. However the powers were conferred on the NFAC only w.c.f 29.03.2022 vide Notification dated 18 of 2022. The issue is squarely covered by plethora of judgement of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment proceeding, therefore, the assessment was framed u/s. 147 read with 144B of the Act is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Ld. AR submitted that at the most the Ld. Pr. CIT could have revised the order passed u/s. 143(1) dated 24.03.2018 but the same is barred by limitation in terms of provisions

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOMANI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

Reassessment) - Assessment year 2013-14 - Assessment order was passed in case of assessee under section 147 read with section 144B - Subsequently, Assessing Officer issued reopening notice against assessee on ground that information was received from investigation wing that assessee was one of beneficiaries who received accommodation entry which was used to avail bogus LTCG/STCL - Tribunal held that Assessing Officer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOMANI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

Reassessment) - Assessment year 2013-14 - Assessment order was passed in case of assessee under section 147 read with section 144B - Subsequently, Assessing Officer issued reopening notice against assessee on ground that information was received from investigation wing that assessee was one of beneficiaries who received accommodation entry which was used to avail bogus LTCG/STCL - Tribunal held that Assessing Officer

M/S ROYAL TOUCH FABLON PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 144B of the Act. 4. The assessee challenged the said order before Ld. CIT(A) on legal issue against the reopening of assessment that too without satisfying the conditions as enumerated u/s. 147 of the Act and also on the ground that the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued beyond time as provided under

MANISH PARASRAMPURIA,KOLKATA vs. A.O., NFAC / D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-43, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 read with section 144B of the Act. Accordingly, the legal grounds raised by the assessee in this

MRS. NEELAM AGRAWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-37(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No.756/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mrs. Neelam Agarwal ………. Appellant (Pan: Adcpa3772G) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-37(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, , Addl. Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 22.07.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Revision Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Kolkat-13 [In Short Ld. “Pr. Cit”] Dated 15.03.2024 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act By Ao, Nfac, Delhi Dated 27.03.2022. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Read As Under: “1. For That The Ld. Pcit Erred In Revising The Reassessment Order Which Was Itself Invalid & Bad In Law As Sanction For Reopening Of Assessment Proceedings Was Not Taken From Prescribed Authority As Per Section 151. I.T.A. No. 756/Kol/2024 Neelam Agarwal, Ay : 2015-16

u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by AO, NFAC, Delhi dated 27.03.2022. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: “1. For that the Ld. PCIT erred in revising the reassessment order which was itself invalid and bad in law as sanction for reopening of assessment proceedings was not taken from prescribed authority as per section

PRAMOD LAKRA DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD, KOLKATA

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

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

147 read with Section 144B of the Act, the purported action of the Learned CIT (Appeals) in upholding the addition, to the extent of Rs. 27,73,218/-, under Section 69C of the Act is arbitrary, unjustified, unwarranted and illegal and hence all proceedings in pursuance thereof are liable to be quashed and/or set aside. XII. FOR THAT the entire

URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

147 read with Section 144B of the Act, the purported action of the Learned CIT (Appeals) in upholding the addition, to the extent of Rs. 27,73,218/-, under Section 69C of the Act is arbitrary, unjustified, unwarranted and illegal and hence all proceedings in pursuance thereof are liable to be quashed and/or set aside. XII. FOR THAT the entire

RAMOTAR CHOUDHARI HUF,KOLKATA vs. PCIT 5 KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1336/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ramotar Choudhari Huf.……..…………............…...……………....Appellant 7Th Floor, R.N 25 Fortuna Tower, 23A N.S. Road, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aanhr9093K] Vs. Pcit-5, Kolkata………….…...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Pransukha, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 06, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 09, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 18.10.2023 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,55,970/- On 21.01.2014. Thereafter, An Information Was Received By The Assessing Officer From Investigation Wing That The Assessee Has

144B on 30/03/2022 determining total income of Rs.2,55,970/- accepting the return income of the assesse. 4.2 On examination of the assessment record, it is observed from the accounts filed that the assessee has claimed exempt Long Term Capital Gain amounting u/s 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the tune

NEHA DIWAN,HINDMOTOR vs. ITO WARD - 23(1), HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

u/s 148 as invalid on the ground of delayed e-verification, despite technical issues with the income tax portal. The return was duly uploaded and verified before the finalization of the assessment. The AO failed to appreciate the CBDT’s guidance to accommodate portal-related delays. 2. That the assessment order dated 31st March, 2022 passed by Ld. Income

KRISHNA CHANDRA MONDAL,CHINSURAH vs. ACIT, CIR. 23(1), HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated herein above

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

147 read with Section 144B of the Act dated 27.09.2021. I.T.A. No.: 58/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Krishna Chandra Mondal. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO when the notice u/s 148 issued by the ACIT Circle

MADHU DEVI JAJODIA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 1912/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Madhu Devi Jajodia,………………………………Appellant Room No. 406, Swaika Center, 4A, Pollock Street, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Acupj1236H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………………Respondent Ward-36(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 28, 2024 O R D E R

144B of the Act dated 24th March, 2022 while ignoring the fact that the reopening was made in violation of 1st proviso to section 147 of the Act. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 16.03.2016 declaring total income of Rs.17,05,420/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny

MATHLETICS LLP FORMERLY MATHLETICS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 Mathletics Llp Formerly Ito, Ward-9(1), Mathletics (P) Ltd. Kolkata C/O. P.K. Himmatsinghka, 41 Vs. B.B. Ganguly Street, Central Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata- 700012. Pan: Aaxfm 4704 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Pramod Kumar Himmatsinghka, Ar Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.04.2023 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/104812839(1) Dated 21.12.2022 Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2015-16. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are As Under:

144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for A.Y. 2015-16. 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are as under: i. For that the reassessment proceedings itself being bad in law, the consequential proceedings are also bad in law. ii. For that the reason recorded is arbitrary, whimsical

DIPANSHU GUPTA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 37(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act\nby the AO.\n3.) (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred\nin confirming the huge addition of Rs. 4,84,23,000/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE\nof the Act without going into the merits of addition.\n(b) That on the facts