M/S VINAYAK FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 147 of the\n\nPage | 21\n\n24\nITA No.2695/KOL/2024\n\nPage\nIncome Tax Act, 1961. The A.O. has to apply his mind to the information, if any,\ncollected and must from a belief thereon. In the circumstances, there is no merit in the\ncivil appeal. The department was not entitled to reopen the assessment.\nIn this regard, reference

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

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross objection of the different assessees are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar] "ी संजय गग" "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम"

56 DTR (Guj.) 212.” Thus in absence of basic requirement of Section 147 of the Act, the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer was held to be invalid. The Court in this case also has held and observed that in reassessment proceedings the income escaped must exceed rupees one lakh as per the limitation set out under the provisions

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S G.K.ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross objection of the different assessees are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar] "ी संजय गग" "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम"

56 DTR (Guj.) 212.” Thus in absence of basic requirement of Section 147 of the Act, the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer was held to be invalid. The Court in this case also has held and observed that in reassessment proceedings the income escaped must exceed rupees one lakh as per the limitation set out under the provisions

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SICPA INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147/148 without appreciating the fact that the same has been done in utter disregard of the express provisions of the Act on fresh application of mind on the same set of facts, more so when there was no failure on the part of the appellant to disclose truly and fully all the facts necessary for completion

MACKINTOSH BURN LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1736/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08)

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act without appreciating that the said proceedings were initiated on the basis of audit objections and without independent application of mind by the AO. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to Ground No. 1(a),1(b)&1(c) taken hereinabove

ACIT (OSD), WARD - 12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AMRABATHI INVESTRA PVT. LTD., 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)

56 (Hyderabad) (AT)-Amended provision of 147 provides ample power to the Assessing Officer to start reassessment proceedings when he is of the opinion that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Amrabathi Investra Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos.231 & 365/Kol/2017 Assessment Year:2009-10 In view of the above discussion ground no. 1 of original ground and ground

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)

56 (Hyderabad) (AT)-Amended provision of 147 provides ample power to the Assessing Officer to start reassessment proceedings when he is of the opinion that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Amrabathi Investra Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos.231 & 365/Kol/2017 Assessment Year:2009-10 In view of the above discussion ground no. 1 of original ground and ground

M/S PARAMOUNT PROPERTIES & ESTATE DEVELOPMENTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed on legal grounds

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedi.T.A. No.93/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2005-06 M/S. Paramount Properties & I.T.O., Wd-3(1), Kolkata. P-7, Chowringhee Square, Estate Developments Ltd. -Vs- Kolkata – 700 069. 3, Pretoria Street, 4Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 071. [Pan : Aabcp 8731 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

147 of the Act can be reopened by the AO beyond the period of 4 years if it is found that income has escaped assessment by the reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return u/s139 or in response to a notice issued under sub-section (1) of Section 142 or Section

ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S BPO FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.99/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata……..........................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Bpo Finance & Investments Pvt. Ltd. .……........……..…..…..Respondent R No.54,5/1, Clive Row (2Nd Floor), Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aaccb5328F] Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 15, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 04, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 10.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Revenue Originally Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld, Cit(A) Was Justified In The Quashing The Addition Of Rs. 1,85,000,00/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Share Capital & Premium In The Course Assessment In Absence Of Identity Of The Creditors, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Entire Transactions. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld, Cit(A) Was Justified In The Quashing The Addition Of Rs. 1,85,00,000/-Made By The Assessing Officer Where No Personal Attendance Was Made By Any Director Of The Share Allottee Companies During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings & As Such Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Creditors & Genuineness Of Transactions Could Not Be Verified.

section 68 of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. Rs. 13,56,097/- u/s. 14A of the Act, denying the findings of the Assessing Officer. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate

BHARGAB ENGINEERING WORKS,HOWRAH vs. PCIT, CENTRAL KOLKATA 2, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 dated 30.03.2023, and the expenditure claimed was required to be disallowed. Therefore, a sum of ₹ 17,03,551/- to be disallowed under section 36(1)(va) of the Act and another sum of ₹ 45,236/-, which was required to be disallowed as per Explanation 1 to sub-section (1) of section

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

56,010/- making two additions (i) on account of\nundisclosed income of Rs.3,45,57,465/- and (ii) on account of undisclosed investment of\nRs.1,19,95,195/-.\n4. In the appellate proceeding, the assessee did challenge the validity of assessment\nproceeding u/s. 143 on the ground of borrowed satisfaction. However, the issue of invalid\napproval u/s

WEST BENGAL ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

56,11,008/- from which Rs.\n20,67,655/- was deducted as proportionate municipal tax and net rent\nwas arrived at Rs. 12,35,43,352/-. Thereafter, the AO noted that\nassessment framed revealed that the gross rent was aggregate of rent,\nelectricity charges recovery, service charges and permission fee and thus\nthe assessee has claimed excess standard deduction u/s

PRICE WATERHOUSE & CO., [NOW KNOWN AS PRICE WATERHOUSE & CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS LLP],KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 22, , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. Dcit, Circle-22, Kolkata Price Waterhouse & Co, Kolkata (Now Versus Known As Price Waterhouse & Co Chartered Accountants Llp)

reassessment order was passed with variation, modification, altercation of the recorded reasons which is impermissible under the law. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 31,12,50,000 treating the non-refundable grant received by the Assessee from PricewaterhouseCoopers Services BV, Netherlands ('Services

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,DELHI vs. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

56,010/- making two additions – (i) on account of\nundisclosed income of Rs.3,45,57,465/- and (ii) on account of undisclosed investment of\nRs.1,19,95,195/-.\n4.\nIn the appellate proceeding, the assessee did challenge the validity of assessment\nproceeding u/s. 143 on the ground of borrowed satisfaction. However, the issue of invalid\napproval u/s

WEST BENGAL ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

56,11,008/- from which Rs.\n20,67,655/- was deducted as proportionate municipal tax and net rent\nwas arrived at Rs. 12,35,43,352/-. Thereafter, the AO noted that\nassessment framed revealed that the gross rent was aggregate of rent,\nelectricity charges recovery, service charges and permission fee and thus\nthe assessee has claimed excess standard deduction u/s

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and C

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.724/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dcit, Circle-10(2), Kolkata Vs. M/S V2 Retail Ltd. Plot- No.8, Pocket-2, Block-A, Rangpuri Extensions, Nh-8, New Delhi-110037. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcv5632P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) C.O No.11/Kol/2020 (In I.T.A No.724/Kol/2018) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S V2 Retail Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-10(2), Kolkata Plot- No.8, Pocket-2, Block-A, Rangpuri Extensions, Nh-8, New Delhi-110037. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcv5632P (Cross-Objector) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Manish Kanojia, Dr Respondent By : Shri K. K. Chhaparia, Fca & Nirav Sheth, Fca सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Cross-Objection Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 25.01.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Arising Out Of The Order Dated 20.03.2015 Passed

reassessment proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act. It has been submitted by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee that the final order u/s 147/143(3) of the Act was passed on the basis of the reasons recorded on 20.05.14 by the DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata for the assessment year 2009-10 i.e. after the four years from the date

ANJU DARUKA,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1),, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 148.\nYes I am satisfied Sd/-\nP.K. Gupta)\nPr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2,\nNew Delhi\nDated: 22.03.2017\"\n13. The satisfaction arrived at by the concerned Officer should be discernible from the\nsanction order passed under Section 151 of the Act. However, as may be seen, the\napproval order is bereft of any reason. There is no whisper

I.T.O.WD-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BLUE HEAVEN GRIHA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm] I.T.A No. 2270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income-Tax Officer, Wd-1(4), Kolkata. Vs. Blue Heaven Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. (Pan: Aaccb3287F) (Appellant) (Respondent)

u/s 143(1) was issued. The first aspect is as to whether having regard to the reasons recording, the AO was competent to initiate proceedings under section 147 by issue of notice under section 148. The assessment year involved is 2008-09 for which the notice under section 148 was issued within four years on November 3, 2011. There