M/S. DEVANSH EXPORTS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 32, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

152 are substantially different from the provisions as they stood prior to such substitutions. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed to confer jurisdiction under section 147(a) two conditions were required to be satisfied: firstly

SARDA MINES PVT. LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-05(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 867/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd...............................………………………………………………Appellant 6Th Floor, Circular Court, 8, Ajc Bose Road, Kolkata – 700017. [Pan : Aahcs 2419 R] D.C.I.T., Cir 5(2) Kolkata………………………………………………......................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 69 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Gupta, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Md. Usman, Cit Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 14, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Principal Cit – 2, Kolkata Dated 28.03.2017 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: “1. For That The Order Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -2, Kolkata (In Short ‘Cit’) Dated 28.03.2017 Is Without Jurisdiction & Illegal As None Of The Condition Precedent For Exercise Of The Power Under Section 263 Of The Act Exists And/Or Has Been Satisfied & As Such The Said Order Is Erroneous & Without Jurisdiction & Liable To Be Cancelled. 2. For That The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Was Not In Any Way Erroneous Or Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & As Such The Cit Would Not Exercise Any Power Under Section 263 Of The Act. The Cit Erred In Holding That The Order Of Assessment Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

u/s 194I of the Income Tax Act. The assessee company had claimed the sum as business expenditure. Accordingly to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, the sold expenditure is not allowable. 8 I.T.A. No. 867/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd. On the basis of the above, it appears that

BUDHIYA AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1231/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष"S / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Budhiya Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Kolkata

152 are substantially different from the provisions as they stood prior to such substitutions. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed to confer jurisdiction under section 147(a) two conditions were required to be satisfied: firstly

ALOSHA MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member)

Reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 are in challenge before us. The assessee- company has filed its return under section 139(1) of the Act on 21.09.2011 and processed u/s 143(1)(a) and the notice for reopening has been issued on 28.03.2016 under section 148 of the Act. Though reasons recorded have been extracted supra but for the sake

AJAY TRADING COMPANY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIR. 3(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 147 of the Act provides that reopening after a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year where assessment has been framed u/s 143(3) can only be made , if escapement of income has taken place because of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any material fact in the return of income

M/S. OSIAN STOCK BROKING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD- 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 408/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Osian Stock Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), C/O S M Surana Advocate Kolkata Vs Unit No. 1501 15Th Floor Diamond Heritage 16, Strand Road Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaaco3479N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Fca Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30/01/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is The Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 13/06/2022 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Has Assailed The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) On Legal Issue As Well As On Merit As Raised In The Concise Grounds Of Appeal Filed By The Assessee Which Are Reproduced Below: “1. For That The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Not Properly Appreciating The Facts & Disposing The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee. 2. For That The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Ao Has Taken Into Consideration All Legal Steps Before Initiating Action U/S 147 When The Reopening Of Assessment Was Not In Accordance With Law.

Section 147 of the Act provides that reopening after a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year where assessment has been framed u/s 143(3) can only be made , if escapement of income has taken place because of failure on I.T.A. No. 408/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Osian Stock Pvt. Ltd. 6 the part

DCIT, CIR. 13(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S PACHARIA EXPORTS PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-13(1), M/S. Pacharia Exports Pvt. Kolkata Ltd. 37, Gangananchal Vs. Apartment, Dr. Abani Dutta Road, Salkia, Howrah- 711106. Pan: Aabcp6955D (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross-Objection No.29/Kol/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.558/Kol/2020) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Pacharia Exports Dcit, Circle-13(1), Kolkata Pvt. Ltd. 37, Gangananchal Vs. Apartment, Dr. Abani Dutta Road, Salkia, Howrah-711106. Pan: Aabcp6955D (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.03.2022 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Appeal By The Revenue & Cross-Objection By The Assessee Are Filed Against The Order Dated 16.09.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

152) (Guj HC)” 7. The Ld. AR of the assessee also drew our attention to the notice issued u/s 148 dated 29.03.2018 and the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment copies whereof are filed at page no. 56 to 58 and submitted that the reasons were in fact recorded approximately after 25 days from the date of issuance of notice

ACIT, CIR - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result the cross objections of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

152) (Guj HC)” The ld Counsel of the assessee argued that on this count alone proceedings as well as the assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act deserved to be quashed. 7. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the order of AO by submitting that the case of the assessee has validly been reopened

ACIT, CIR - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result the cross objections of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

152) (Guj HC)” The ld Counsel of the assessee argued that on this count alone proceedings as well as the assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act deserved to be quashed. 7. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the order of AO by submitting that the case of the assessee has validly been reopened

ACIT, CIR - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result the cross objections of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

152) (Guj HC)” The ld Counsel of the assessee argued that on this count alone proceedings as well as the assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act deserved to be quashed. 7. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the order of AO by submitting that the case of the assessee has validly been reopened

PANKAJ DUTTA,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3),DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2206/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Pankaj Dutta..........................................................................................Appellant Prop. Annapurna Construction, M-95A, Yuri Gagarin Path, Bidhannagore, Durgapur - 713212 [Pan : Ahdpd1092P] Income Tax Officer...................…………………………………….........Respondent Ward 1(3), Aayakar Bhawan, City Centre, Durgapur - 713216 Appearances By: Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Biswanath Das, Addl Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 17, 2017 Order This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Cit (Appeals) Durgapur Dated 31.08.2016 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Additional Ground Of Appeal Which Reads As Follows: “Because That The Ld. Income Tax Officer Was Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Passing Of The Order U/S 147/143(3) Dated 30Th March, 2015 Without Issue Of The Statutory Notice U/S 143(2) Of The It Act, 1961 & As Such His Reassessment Order Is Not Good In Law & Void Abinitio. 3. As This Is A Legal Ground, Challenging The Jurisdiction Of The Assessing Officer. As All The Facts Required To Adjudicate This Grounds

u/s 143(2) is mandatory and not procedural. If the notice is not served within the prescribed period, the assessment order is invalid Reassessment-----Notice-----Assessee intimating original return be treated as fresh return----Reassessment proceedings completed despite assessee filing affidavit denying serviced of notice under section 143(2)---- Assessing Officer not representing before Commissioner (Appeals) that notice had been

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

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

u/s 263 of the Act to pass the reassessment order, it is undisputed fact that assessee has not challenged the order before the Tribunal. We are therefore of the considered view that the assessee has not challenged the revisionary order passed under section 263 by the ld. Pr. CIT dated 07.03.2013 before the Tribunal and therefore it has attained finality

BIRESWAR DUTT ESTATES PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 5(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2011-12

u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee’s first and foremost ground pressed during the course of hearing challenges correctness of validity of the impugned re-assessment framed on 23.03.2015 making the disallowance / addition in issue. This assessment order suggests in para

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

section 69C of the Act.\nI have taken into consideration the submissions of the appellant,\nalready extracted above and the findings of the AO as well as the\nmaterial placed on record, It is noted that the impugned addition\nemanated from the information available with the Department,\nwhich was gathered during the course of search and seizure\noperation conducted under

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC - 3(3),, KOLKATA

section 69C of the Act.\nI have taken into consideration the submissions of the appellant,\nalready extracted above and the findings of the AO as well as the\nmaterial placed on record, It is noted that the impugned addition\nemanated from the information available with the Department,\nwhich was gathered during the course of search and seizure\noperation conducted under

REGIS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 147 of the Act. The Id. AR\nvehemently contended that there was no satisfaction recorded in the\nreasons by the AO and he merely treated the information received\nfrom ITO(inv), Unit-1, Kolkata, as gospel truth. The Id. AR further\nsubmitted that the assessee was not having any bank account with\nICICI bank and had never deposited

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

section 69C of the Act.\nI have taken into consideration the submissions of the appellant,\nalready extracted above and the findings of the AO as well as the\nmaterial placed on record, It is noted that the impugned addition\nemanated from the information available with the Department,\nwhich was gathered during the course of search and seizure\noperation conducted under

SANJAY KUMAR SURANA,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm ]

147 of the Act. Thereafter, the AO records that reasons to reopen was duly communicated to the assessee and notice u/s. 142(1) dt. 21-11-2016 along with questionnaire were issued; and after serving upon the assessee the notices, the assessee replied to the AO to treat the original return of income as filed in response