AMRABATHI INVESTRA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.231/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

274 ITR 25 (Cal.), the reopening of assessment is bad in law. We note that there is change in opinion as the assessee has disclosed all the material facts in its return of income, wherein, balance sheet along with annexures, bills vouchers, invoices were filed and the Assessing Officer had considered the same while completing the original assessment u/s

MAITHAN CERAMIC LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

274,795/-\nwas duly deducted under Section 194A of the Act. (Page-90)\nDuring the course of the assessment proceedings, notice/s 142(1)\nissued seeking details of unsecured loan raised during the financial\nyear 2010-11, indicating the name(s), complete postal address and\nPAN(s) of the loan creditors, the assessee furnished the loan\nconfirmation and produced its bank

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. V2 RETAIL LTD., NEW DELHI

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

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

u/s 143(3) of the Act and as four years have expired from the end of the relevant assessment year 2008-09. He relied on a number of case laws including i. D.C.I.T, Circle - 11(1) Vs. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. ITANo. 2291/Kol/2016 Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata. ii. Amiya Sales & Industries Vs A.C.I.T 274 ITR 25, Hon’ble High Court

V2 RETAIL LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

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

u/s 143(3) of the Act and as four years have expired from the end of the relevant assessment year 2008-09. He relied on a number of case laws including i. D.C.I.T, Circle - 11(1) Vs. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. ITANo. 2291/Kol/2016 Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata. ii. Amiya Sales & Industries Vs A.C.I.T 274 ITR 25, Hon’ble High Court

D.C.I.T., CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EVERSIGHT TRADE COMM PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and copy of common order passed is to be placed on respective case files

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

147 of the Act in response to the same, assessee company filed relevant documents as required and assessment was completed determining Nil income in the hands of the assessee. Further, the ld. AO has initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act in response to such proceeding assessee filed a detailed reply. However, ld. AO was not satisfied

D.C.I.T., CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EVERSIGHT TRADE COMM PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and copy of common order passed is to be placed on respective case files

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

147 of the Act in response to the same, assessee company filed relevant documents as required and assessment was completed determining Nil income in the hands of the assessee. Further, the ld. AO has initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act in response to such proceeding assessee filed a detailed reply. However, ld. AO was not satisfied

D.C.I.T., CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EVERSIGHT TRADECOMM PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and copy of common order passed is to be placed on respective case files

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

147 of the Act in response to the same, assessee company filed relevant documents as required and assessment was completed determining Nil income in the hands of the assessee. Further, the ld. AO has initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act in response to such proceeding assessee filed a detailed reply. However, ld. AO was not satisfied

ITO, WARD-29(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AUTO CARE, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1484/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Ito, Ward-29(3), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Auto Care Centre [Pan: Aahfa 8997 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

147 / 143(3) was ever received / served. c) that the initiation of the penalty proceedings was bad in law. d) that even otherwise, the impugned penalty had already been barred by the limitation. The ld JCIT however did not heed to the aforesaid contentions of the assessee and proceeded to levy penalty on the entire repayment of loans to partner

TERAI FRUITS COMPANY,SILIGURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), SILIGURI, SILIGURI

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

147 of the Act and a notice u/s 148 of the Act was served upon the assessee, in response to which, the assessee filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 2,88,770/-. 3.1 In the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee responded that an existing partner Shri Babul Pal Chaudhary was a partner

ACITCC-3(2), KOLKATA vs. SMT. SAVITRI DEVI AGARWAL, BILASPUR

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

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

274 and section 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty leviable under the proposed new section. For the purposes of this section it has been proposed to define undisclosed income so as to mean- (i) any income of the specified previous years represented, either wholly or partly, by any money, bullion, jewellery or other

ACIT CC-3(2) , KOLKATA vs. SMT. KALAWATI DEVI AGARWAL, BILASPUR

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

274 and section 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty leviable under the proposed new section. For the purposes of this section it has been proposed to define undisclosed income so as to mean- (i) any income of the specified previous years represented, either wholly or partly, by any money, bullion, jewellery or other

ACIT CC-3(2),, KOLKATA vs. SRI ARJUN LAL AGARWAL , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

274 and section 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty leviable under the proposed new section. For the purposes of this section it has been proposed to define undisclosed income so as to mean- (i) any income of the specified previous years represented, either wholly or partly, by any money, bullion, jewellery or other

M/S. MUSE ADVERTISING AND MEDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 10(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 147 was not satisfied. The Ld. AR relied on a series of decisions in support of this contention as well namely, PCIT v. GRD Commodities Ltd (149 taxmann.com 223) [Cal HC], Amiya Sales & Industries v. ACIT (274 ITR 25) [Cal HC], Uni VTL Precision (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (113 taxmann.com 533) [Bom HC], Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing

DCIT, CIR-5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed and the cross objection 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]

274 (Mad.) wherein a similar issue arose and the Hon’ble High court was pleased to hold that the second notice issued for reopening when the first notice for reopening pursuant to which the assessee had filed the return has not been disposed of then, the second notice of reopening could not have been issued by the AO and, therefore

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 313/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Alosha Marketing Pvt. Ltd.,……………..………Appellant 62A, Hazra Road, Kolkata-700019 [Pan:Aacca1930G] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,.…Respondent Circle-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri N.S. Saini, A.R. & Priyanka Salarpuria, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 08, 2024 O R D E R

147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as above. Issued Demand Notice u/s 156, penalty notice u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Income and tax computation sheet and a copy of the assessment order to the assessee”. 7 Alosha Marketing Pvt. Ltd. 4. Dissatisfied with the reopening as well as addition

D.C.I.T CC - VII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI SHYAM SUNDER DHANUKA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

147 of the Act. However, we do not agree with the findings of Ld CIT(A) that assessee was not searched u/s 132 of the Act, therefore, the provision of Explanation 5A to Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act is not applicable to assessee. At this juncture, we would like to reproduce the provision of Explanation

AMIT KHEMKA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 43(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

147 Order, presumed the entire deposits as trading receipts and by applying 8% estimated margin derived the additional total income at Rs. 18,58,785/-. b) The assessee would like to state that such calculation is made on an ad-hoc basis and is construed to be an act on the basis of certain presumption, conjecture and surmise. The assessee

AMIT KHEMKA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 43(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

147 Order, presumed the entire deposits as trading receipts and by applying 8% estimated margin derived the additional total income at Rs. 18,58,785/-. b) The assessee would like to state that such calculation is made on an ad-hoc basis and is construed to be an act on the basis of certain presumption, conjecture and surmise. The assessee