BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

75 results for “section 68”+ Section 155clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi737Mumbai619Karnataka498Bangalore180Jaipur161Ahmedabad138Chennai104Cochin84Hyderabad81Kolkata75Indore62Chandigarh60Calcutta53Raipur50Pune49Surat34Allahabad33Telangana32Lucknow32Cuttack23Nagpur21Rajkot17SC16Varanasi9Amritsar8Visakhapatnam8Jodhpur7Jabalpur7Rajasthan6Guwahati5Agra4Orissa3Patna1Uttarakhand1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)63Section 26356Addition to Income53Section 115J33Section 6829Section 15426Section 25023Section 14722Deduction19Disallowance

ITO, WARD-10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S POSITIVE PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2274/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

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

Section 68

155 ITD 171, that the question being addressed is not whether share premium is chargeable to tax but about the taxability or otherwise of such share capital I premium in terms of sec.68. 9. Further Reliance was also placed by the Ld. CIT, DR on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs. N. R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 222 Taxmann

ITO, WARD-10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GATEWAY ENCLAVE PVT.LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2269/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2019AY 2012-13

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

Showing 1–20 of 75 · Page 1 of 4

19
Section 14A18
Depreciation17
Section 68

155 ITD 171, that the question being addressed is not whether share premium is chargeable to tax but about the taxability or otherwise of such share capital & premium in terms of sec.68. 9. Further Reliance was also placed by the Ld. CIT, DR on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs. N. R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 222 Taxmann

M/S OMKAR INFRACON PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-12(2), KOLKATA

ITA 896/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

155 to 206 of the paper book. The details of other loans and advance taken by the assessee company from 11 I.T.A No. 896/Kol/2019 A.Y 2012-13 the same shareholders which are shown as loans and advance in the books of the assessee company is placed at page 207 to 231 of the paper book. 12. Thus, the AO after

SHANKAR TRADERS & DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 199/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shankar Traders & Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Vs Aaykar Bhawan, A-Block, 1St Floor, Mercantile P-7, Chowringhee Square, Building, 9, Lal Bazar Street, Kolkata-700, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, [Pan: Aadcs8907L] West Bengal अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Susanta Saha, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 68

Section 68 of the Act.” 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, thus, has held that once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness of the subscribers, then the AO is duty bound conduct to conduct an independent enquiry to verify the same. However, as noted above, the Assessing Officer

SEEMA SUREKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2682/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

68 of the\nAct does not overtly result in any significant revenue gain since the rate of\ntax prevailing for this assessment year was 30% u/s 115BBE of the Act.\nThis rate was enhanced to 60% from AY 2017-18 only. While the issue of\ntaxation would at best be a secondary consideration in deciding the merit\nof the case

ACIT, CIR-1, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. SHRI RAKESH KUMAR CHOWDHURY, DURGAPUR

ITA 1810/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

155,68,753/- since the taxpayer had himself offered the remaining sum of ₹100,52,034/- for assessment. 5. The Assessing Officer further declined assessee’s “computer snag” plea to disallow cash payments of ₹2.05 lac u/s. 40A(3) of the Act followed by yet another section

SHRI RAKESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

ITA 422/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

155,68,753/- since the taxpayer had himself offered the remaining sum of ₹100,52,034/- for assessment. 5. The Assessing Officer further declined assessee’s “computer snag” plea to disallow cash payments of ₹2.05 lac u/s. 40A(3) of the Act followed by yet another section

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

ITA 1270/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 35DSection 68

section 263 of the Act. The assesese placed reliance on plethora of judgments and the same are referred below:- S.No. Title CITATION AUTHORITY Following Page No. of LPP Argument:- Mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) CBDT Circular No.549 dated -- 1 31.10.1989 PCIT vs. Oberoi (2018) 409 ITR 132 The Hon’ble High Court of 2 – 6 Hotels

DY. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. FEMINA STOCK MANAGEMENT COMPANY LTD, KOLKATA

ITA 850/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 850/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Cit Central Circle – 1(4), Kolkata Femina Stock Management Company Vs Ltd. 5Th Floor, Room No. 2 P23/24, Radha Bazar Street Tea Board Kolkata - 700001 [Pan: Aaacf3689H] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/10/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata – 21, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 12/05/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 36 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Revenue. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record Explaining The Reasons. On Perusing The Same, We Are Convinced That The Revenue Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing This Appeal In Time. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

section 68 of the Act, for the impugned transactions in relation to the particular company present on those premises. These documents have already been elaborately listed earlier in this order, and included the PAN Card, IT acknowledgement, audited balance sheets and so on. It was also pointed out in the 1st remand report that the inspector did not find

M/S. PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED (SUCCESSOR TO ERSTWHILE PHILIPS SOFTWARE CENTRE PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T. (TRANSFER PRICING) - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 32/KOL/2023[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jun 2024AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 32 & 33/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. Philips India Limited Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax 3Rd Floor, Tower A Vs (Transfer Pricing-Ii), Bangalore [Presently Deputy Dlf Park, 08 Block Af Commissioner/Assistant Major Arterial Road Commissioner Of Income-Tax New Town Transfer Pricing 2, Kolkata Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aabcp9487A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan K. Ved, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Even Dt. 15/11/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. The Sole Issue Raised In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Maintainability Of The Appeals Before The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Rectification Orders Passed By The Transfer Pricing Officer (In Short “Tpo”) U/S 154 R.W. Sub-Section (5) To Section 92Ca Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(A) Vide Impugned Orders Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee Holding That As Per The Provisions Of Section 246A Of The Act, Order U/S 92Ca Or Its Rectification Order U/S 154 Of The Act Passed By The Tpo Is 2

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K. Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 154Section 246ASection 250Section 92C

68[or the collector].] (6) Where any such amendment has the effect of enhancing the assessment69 or reducing a refund 70[already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee or the deductor 71[or the collector], the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee or the deductor 71[or the collector], as the case may be] a notice

M/S. PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED (SUCCESSOR TO ERSTWHILE PHILIPS SOFTWARE CENTRE PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T.(TRANSFER PRICING) - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 33/KOL/2023[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jun 2024AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 32 & 33/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. Philips India Limited Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax 3Rd Floor, Tower A Vs (Transfer Pricing-Ii), Bangalore [Presently Deputy Dlf Park, 08 Block Af Commissioner/Assistant Major Arterial Road Commissioner Of Income-Tax New Town Transfer Pricing 2, Kolkata Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aabcp9487A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan K. Ved, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Even Dt. 15/11/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. The Sole Issue Raised In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Maintainability Of The Appeals Before The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Rectification Orders Passed By The Transfer Pricing Officer (In Short “Tpo”) U/S 154 R.W. Sub-Section (5) To Section 92Ca Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(A) Vide Impugned Orders Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee Holding That As Per The Provisions Of Section 246A Of The Act, Order U/S 92Ca Or Its Rectification Order U/S 154 Of The Act Passed By The Tpo Is 2

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K. Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 154Section 246ASection 250Section 92C

68[or the collector].] (6) Where any such amendment has the effect of enhancing the assessment69 or reducing a refund 70[already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee or the deductor 71[or the collector], the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee or the deductor 71[or the collector], as the case may be] a notice

SPRING HOME PVT LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 652/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A/RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. D/R
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

155/-. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the additions so made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Further aggrieved, the assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the detailed paper book stated that complete documentary evidence have been filed before both

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PREMIER ROAD CARRIERS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 960/KOL/2011[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] I.T.A No. 960/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2000-01 D.C.I.T., Circle-8, -Vs.- M/S. Premier Road Carriers Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcr8968E] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri S.S.Alam, Addl. Cit For The Respondent : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2016. Date Of Pronouncement : 2.12.2016. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Alam, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 158B

section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. (2) That the appellant craves leave to add and/ or modify the ground of appeal at the time of hearing of the case.” 16. The Assessee has filed an application under Rule 27 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963(ITAT Rules), seeking to raise the following grounds of appeal

DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. R.M. COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

ITA 305/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

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

Section 14ASection 250

Section 68 of the Act on account of corporate deposits of Rs. 1,42,95,699/ deposits of Rs. 1,42,95,699/-". 4. That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has That on the facts and in circumstances of the case

DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. R.M. COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

ITA 306/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

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

Section 14ASection 250

Section 68 of the Act on account of corporate deposits of Rs. 1,42,95,699/ deposits of Rs. 1,42,95,699/-". 4. That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has That on the facts and in circumstances of the case

M/S GOLDEN VINCOM PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above

ITA 143/KOL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 263

section 68 of the Act by the Finance Act 2012 w.e.f. 01.04.2013 whereby it has been provided that where the assessee is a company, (not being a company in which the public are substantially interested) and the sum so credited consists of share application money, share capital, share premium or any such amount by whatever name called, any explanation

M/S CLASSIC FLOUR AND FOOD PROCESSING PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-11(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 765 & 766/Kol/2014 are allowed while ITA

ITA 764/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

section 68 of the Act by the Finance Act 2012 w.e.f. 01.04.2013 whereby it has been provided that where the assessee is a company, (not being a company in which the public are substantially interested) and the sum so credited consists of share application money, share capital, share premium or any such amount by whatever ITA Nos.764 to 766/Kol/2014

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1201/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2026AY 2019-2020

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

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

68 and Rs. 11,78,155/- towards alleged unexplained expenditure u/s 69C and in view of the facts and in the circumstances the additions so affirmed by Ld. CIT(A) is wholly bad and illegal and has not legal sanctity as well as facts and the additions so affirmed is liable to be deleted and it may be held accordingly

ADITYA VIKRAM SUREKA, HUF,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 34(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1650/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1650/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Aditya Vikram Sureka Huf -Vs- Ito, Ward-34(2) , Kolkata [Pan: Aamha 4069 D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 29.12.2016 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Though the assessee had raised various grounds before us, the only effective issue involved in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in confirming the addition made towards unexplained cash credit u/s 68

DEEPAK SWITCH GEARS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 809/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd….…......................…...……………....Appellant 48/6, Suman Villa, 2Nd Floor, 155, Jessore Road, Kolkata-700055. [Pan: Aabcd1131H] Vs. Pcit, Asansol….....….........................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 158 Days. A Separate Application Of Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Wherein, It Has Been Pleaded That After Receipt Of The Impugned Order Of The Pr. Cit, The Assessee, Through Its Director, Shri Deep Kishan Saraf, Immediately Approached One Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Chartered

Section 253Section 263Section 5

155, Jessore Road, Kolkata-700055. [PAN: AABCD1131H] vs. PCIT, Asansol….....….........................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : April 08, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : May 07, 2024 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा