GARUD CREDIT & HOLDING PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Garud Credit & Holding Pvt. Limited,.........Appellant D.J. Shah & Co., 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Aaacg9791P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 O R D E R

147 without issuing notice u/s 143(2) is bad in law and is a nullity. Sl. TITLE CITATION AUTHORITY No. . Page No. of LPB I. PCIT vs. Silver Line (2016) 383 ITR Hon’ble High Court 34-40 455 (Del) of Delhi 2. PCIT-08 Vs. Shri Jai ITA No. Hon’ble High Court 41-49 Shiv Shankar Traders 519/2015

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

2. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by setting aside the assessment to the Learned Assessing Officer for fresh assessment under the powers of Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of an order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B and not under Section

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

2. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by setting aside the assessment to the Learned Assessing Officer for fresh assessment under the powers of Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of an order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B and not under Section

OPLUS STEEL AND POWER PVT. LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS SWATI CONCAST AND POWER PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

147 and appellate proceeding u/s 250 was due to reasons beyond my control. 8. I affirm that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.” 5. We have heard the Ld. AR. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and requested that the order

JIYA EXIM PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 5(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

251/-U/s 143(1)\nNo\n10\nWhether the provision of section 150(1) are applicable.\nIf the answer is in the affirmative, the relevant facts\nmay be stated against item no.11 may also be brought\nout that the provision of section 150(2) would not\nstand in the way of initiating Proceedings u/s.147.\nNo\n11\nReasons for the belief that

ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROF INCOMETAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2),KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. M/S. ANUBANDH FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who, vide order dated 03.07.2024, deleted the additions made u/s 68 I.T.A. No.: 2390/KOL/2024 C.O. No.: 5/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Anubandh Financial Services Private Limited. of the Act and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the order

PROVASH ADHIKARI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 46(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment by passing an order u/s. 147/143(3) by making an addition of Rs. 93,57,008/- on account of alleged unexplained cash credit.” 2.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who observed that 5 notices issued at the e-mail addresses i.e. (i) A.PROVASH@GMAIL.COM and (ii) saassociates.adv@gmail.com, which were available

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GUJRAT NRE COKE LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 1789/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Gujrat Nre Coke Ltd. [Pan: Aabcg 6225 H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

251 / 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Both the parties take us to the CIT(A)’s findings under challenge holding the impugned reopening / reassessment to be invalid as with the following detailed discussion: 2 M/s Gujrat NRE Coke Ltd. A.Yr. 2006-07 “3.2. This ground

A.C.I.T, CIR-I, ASANSOL vs. SUBHAMOY MONDAL,, BURDWAN

In the result the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1687 & 1688/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2004-05 & 2005-06

251 (2) for enhancement of income was issued. This is pending. As I have annulled the reassessment, no enhancement is possible. Accordingly I drop the enhancement proceedings.” 5. Similar order was passed in both the assessment years by CIT(A) against which the present appeals have been preferred by the revenue. 3 A.Yrs.2004-05 & 2005-06 6. Aggrieved

JESSOP & CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-1, KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 702/kol/14 is allowed for statistical purpose, while ITA

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 702 & 1045/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S. Jessop & Co.. Ltd. -Vs.- C.I.T., Kolkata-1, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaacj 6969 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr)

251 ITR 785 (Raj). 10. Without prejudice to the aforesaid submissions it was further submitted that the CIT has exercised jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act on the reasoning that the AO did not make adequate enquiries on the computation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. He further brought to our notice that a query was raised

SUGGEST VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. ITO -5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

2). The assessment order has been passed in violation of mandatory provisions of law and is liable be quashed as illegal and not sustainable. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition made in an illegal order. 3. Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding validity of reassessment order without appreciating that the notice issued by AO u/s 148 is illegal

RADIX TIE-UP PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-11(2), KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Sri S. S. Godara] आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.2404/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Radix Tie-Up Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-11(2), Kolkata 184/A, Regent Colony, Tollygunge, Kolkata – 700001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecr1237M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 4, Kolkata’S Order Dated 10.05.2019 Passed In Case No.791/Cit(A)-4/16-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. For The Reasons Stated In Assessee’S Condonation Petition Dated 27.01.20 Explaining Five Days’ Delay To Be Attributable To Various Procedural Aspects & Compilation Of Necessary Records & On Account Of No Objection From The Revenue Side, I Condone The Impugned Delay Of Five Days In Filing Of The Instant Appeal & Proceed To Adjudicate The Same On Merits.

reassessment or recomputation to be made in pursuance of the notice is to be made on him as the agent of such non-resident, the notice shall not be issued after the expiry of a period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. I.T.A No.2404/Kol/2019 Radix Tie-up Pvt. Ltd. 8. Sri Nikhil Agrawal, learned counsel

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

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

147(b). Reliance is placed on Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC), where a Bench of two learned judges of this court observed that a case where income had escaped assessment due to the “oversight, inadvertence or mistake” of the Income-tax Officer must fall within section 34(1)(b) of the Indian Income

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

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

147(b). Reliance is placed on Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC), where a Bench of two learned judges of this court observed that a case where income had escaped assessment due to the “oversight, inadvertence or mistake” of the Income-tax Officer must fall within section 34(1)(b) of the Indian Income

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

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

147(b). Reliance is placed on Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC), where a Bench of two learned judges of this court observed that a case where income had escaped assessment due to the “oversight, inadvertence or mistake” of the Income-tax Officer must fall within section 34(1)(b) of the Indian Income

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,DCIT, CIR. 8(1) vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

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

147(b). Reliance is placed on Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC), where a Bench of two learned judges of this court observed that a case where income had escaped assessment due to the “oversight, inadvertence or mistake” of the Income-tax Officer must fall within section 34(1)(b) of the Indian Income

M/S FANTASTIC FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 251 of the Act applicable w.e.f. 01/10/2024, I hereby set aside the impugned assessment order dated 12.05.2023 passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act to the file of the AO for fresh assessment after affording reasonable opportunities to the appellant and diligently adhering to the principle of natural justice. The appellant is directed to comply with notices issued

M/S. G.S. ATWAL & COMPANY (ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

reassessment order u/s. 147/143 dated 19.12.2013 without reasonable opportunity of hearing although the assessment will be barred by limitation on 31.03.2015, as the total interest awarded ,of Rs. 10,58,25,030/- to be divided equally in 10 assessment year i.e. Rs. 105,82,503/- for the assessment year 2005-06. That the basis for reopening the assessment u/s