H,L.G.MEMORIAL HOSPITAL (P) LTD.,ASANSOL vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, ASANSOL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble) Assessment Years: 2007-08 Hlg Memorial Hospital Pvt. Ltd….………........................................................……………….…......Appellant Sen Railegh Road Asansol – 713 305 West Bengal [Pan : Aabch 3927 P] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Asansol……………….............….……....…....Respondent Appearances By: Shri K.M. Roy, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 27Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 13Th , 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

245/- has been claimed by the assessee. it is also observed that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs.4,15,310/- @ 10% on Building under construction. 2 Assessment Years: 2007-08 HLG Memorial Hospital Pvt. Ltd HLG Memorial Hospital Pvt. Ltd. In the light of the above facts, it is apparent that the assessee has claimed ht of the above

KIPPY ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment\nproceedings were wrongly initiated vide notice dated 14.03.2019 u/s. 148 and that the\nmandatory approval of the sanctioning authority i.e. the principal commissioner of\nincome tax as required to be obtained u/s. 151 of the act is invalid.\n(b) That the sanctioning authority i.e. the principal commissioner of income tax has not\napplied his mind while granting

COAL INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T (OSD) CIR - 5,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

u/s. 139 or in respect to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 or section 148 of the Act or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year. None of these conditions is satisfied in this matter so as to enable the AO to invoke section 147

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

245/-. The return of the assessee was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 18.06.2013. Thereafter, case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. Finally, the assessment was framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act vide order dated 29.09.2021. It is pertinent to state that case

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. GAURAV ROSE REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

245 ITR 0567 has held that:- After completion of the assessment, the assessing officer had issued notice under section 148 read with section 147, to the petitioner, asking the petitioner that its income had escaped as deduction under section 32AB(S) allowed more than the amount permissible under section 32AB of the Act The petitioner has challenged this notice

A.C.I.T., CIR-II, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PHILIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

147 of the Act on 11.3.2005 by making totally six additions including the two additions for which reasons were recorded by the Learned AO. When this was challenged in the first round of appellate proceedings, this tribunal in ITA No. 2444/Kol/2005 and ITA No. 2625/Kol/2005 dated 25.6.2007 had upheld the validity of the reassessment proceedings on assumption of jurisdiction

HEM LATA JHUNJHUNWALA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(2), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in this respect for AY 2011-12 are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

147 by issuing a notice u/s. 148 claiming it to be illegal, arbitrary and excessive and not in accordance with the law. Hem Lata Jhunjhunwala, AYs 2011-12 & 2012-13 Assessee has also raised a jurisdictional issue alleging that notice u/s. 143(2) was not issued. On merits of the case, assessee has challenged the addition made

HEM LATA JHUNJHUNWALA ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-11(2), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in this respect for AY 2011-12 are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

147 by issuing a notice u/s. 148 claiming it to be illegal, arbitrary and excessive and not in accordance with the law. Hem Lata Jhunjhunwala, AYs 2011-12 & 2012-13 Assessee has also raised a jurisdictional issue alleging that notice u/s. 143(2) was not issued. On merits of the case, assessee has challenged the addition made

DCIT, CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MANI SQUARE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

reassess this issue which was before the Settlement Commission before the AO issued notice for reopening itself. We also note that the order Mani Square Ltd., AY, 2006-07 of the Hon'ble Settlement Commission is final and conclusive as per Section 245-1 of the Act which states that "Every order of settlement passed under sub- section

DCIT,CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MANI SQUARE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

reassess this issue which was before the Settlement Commission before the AO issued notice for reopening itself. We also note that the order Mani Square Ltd., AY, 2006-07 of the Hon'ble Settlement Commission is final and conclusive as per Section 245-1 of the Act which states that "Every order of settlement passed under sub- section

M/S. PEARL TRACOM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Pearl Tracom Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle 3(1) C/O M/S Salarpuriajajodia& Co.7, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, C.R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Chworinghee Square, Kolkata- Vs. Kolkata-700072, West Bengal 700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp9934G Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.04.2026

reassessment notice u/s 148 of the Act as well as the consequent assessment framed. M/s Pearl Tracom Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2019-20 3.3. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the assessee has challenged the issue of notice u/s.148 of the Act and also the assessment framed u/s.147/143

M/S. BMS SALES PVT. LTD., ,PURULIA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based\non an invalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated\n15.01.2024.\n2.1. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under\nconsideration on 31.10.2019 declaring total income of\nRs.17,25,39,330/- under normal provision

M/S. UJJAL TRANSPORT AGENCY,ASANSOL vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-XVI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee's CO is partly allowed”

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1601/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Ujjal Transport Agency, -Vs- Dcit, Central, Circle-Xvi, Kolkata G.T.Road(East), Murgasole Asansol Pan : Aaafu 6732 H] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : A. K. Tibrewal, Fca Amit Agarwal, Adv. For The Respondent : None Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2014 Order

reassessment proceedings, the Ld. AO disallowed the additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) of the Act in the sum of Rs. 1,27,20,257/- on the ground that the assessee during the year was engaged only in contractors job and not involved in any manufacture or production of any article or thing so as to be eligible for additional

ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIR.-1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. MAHABIR PRASAD GUPTA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

245/-. The assessee did not file the return of income as required u/s 139(1) of the Act. Ld. AO accordingly issued notice u/s 276CC of the Act dated 12.07.2017 directing the assessee to show cause in writing as to why the prosecution proceedings should not be initiated against him. In response, the assessee submitted that the source of alleged

STREAM SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceedings are governed by Section 144B read with Sections 148 and 151A, requiring issuance by the Faceless Assessing Officer, whereas the impugned notice was wrongly issued by the Jurisdictional AO, Ward 7(1), Kolkata. 2. For That Appellate Authority failed to appreciate that the notice under Section 148 is barred by limitation in accordance with Section

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. IMC LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.]" Perusal of Section 14A of the Act provides that it mandates disallowance of expenditure 'in relation

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. I M C LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.]" Perusal of Section 14A of the Act provides that it mandates disallowance of expenditure 'in relation

M/S. IMC LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.]" Perusal of Section 14A of the Act provides that it mandates disallowance of expenditure 'in relation

SHREE RAMCHANDRA INGOT INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC-4(3),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 6. For that the order passed by the ld CIT(A) to the extent confirming the additions and rejecting the grounds of appeal is bad in facts and law.” 4. Ground Nos.1,5 & 6 of appeal are general in nature, hence requires no separate adjudication