ESTATE OF BINOY KUMAR CHANDRA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 32(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Estate Of Binoy Kumar Chandra Vs. Office Of The Income-Tax Officer P-24, C.I.T. Road Entally, Ward-32(2), Kolkata, 10B, Kolkata-700014, West Bengal Middleton Row, Kolkata-700 71 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabae6679B Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Lata Goyal, Ars Revenue By : Shri Aditya Bikram, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.04.2026

section 270A(2)(b) of the Act. Estate of Binoy Kumar Chandra; A.Y. 2020-21 3. The facts in brief are that Mr. Binoy Kumar Chandra, died on 13.06.2019 and post demise of the said person, estate of the deceased was formed, as “Estate of Binoy Kumar Chandra”. Thereafter, a petition was filed before the Hon’ble Calcutta High

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BHAVYA MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeals by the revenue are dismissed and cross-objections by the assessee are allowed

270A and 271AAB as explained above while considering as to what material would constitute incriminating for the purposes of assessment of total income under section 153A/C. 20. The provisions of section 153A/153C are not the normal assessment provisions like 143(3); rather they are curative provisions to plug the mischief of evasion of taxable income based on evidences

MILK MANTRA DAIRY (P) LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIR.-12(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Milk Mantra Dairy Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Pan: Aagcm1112L Income-Tax Vs. 7Th Floor, Z Tower, Patia Circle-12(1) Nandan Kanan Road, Kolkata. Bhubaneswar-751024. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Rajib Sharma & Shri Jai Somani, Ars Respondent By : Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.07.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Cit(A)-4, Kolkata In Appeal No. 491/Cit(A)-4/16-17 Dated 03.02.2020 Against The Assessment Order Of Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata Passed U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) Dated 13.01.2017. 2. There Is A Delay Of 73 Days In Filing The Present Appeal For Which A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record. From The Condonation Petition, We Note That The Present Appeal Ought To Have Been Filed On Or Before 17.04.2020 Which Falls During The Lockdown Period On Account Of Pandemic Of Covid-19. It Is Requested By The Assessee That Since It Is Prevented By Sufficient & Reasonable Cause, The Delay Of 73 Days In Filing The Appeal May Be Condoned & Appeal Be Admitted For Meritorious Disposal. We Have Heard Both The Sides & Find That Vide Order Dated 10.01.2022, Hon’Ble Supreme Court Has Directed That The Period From 15.03.2020 To 28.02.2022 Is To Be Excluded For The Purpose Of Computing The 2 Milk Mantra Dairy (P) Ltd. A.Y. 2013-14 Limitation Period During The Covid-19 Pandemic. Further, A Period Of 90 Days Is Allowed After 28.02.2022 Vide Same Order. Considering The Facts & The Explanation Of The Assessee, We Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Admit It For Adjudication.

270A for the said previous year. Explanation: - For the purposes of this clause,— 12 Milk Mantra Dairy (P) Ltd. A.Y. 2013-14 (a) the “fair market value” of the shares shall be the value— (i) as may be determined in accordance with such method as may be prescribed; or (ii) as may be substantiated by the company to the satisfaction

ANITA BASAK,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC 1(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Anita Basak Acit, Central Circle 1(1), C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Kolkata, Advocates, Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, 2, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Floor, Suite 110 Shanti Pally, 5 Th Floor, Vs. No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata, Eastern Metropolitian By Pass, West Bengal-700001, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahhpb5785B Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.12.2025

270A sub section 1 of the Act on the ground that the assessee has not furnished the records and Anita Basak; A.Y. 2018-19 therefore, the ld. AO was not satisfied with the correctness and completeness of the accounts. Accordingly, the books of accounts were rejected u/s 145(3) of the Act and the income of the assessee

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED (SUCCESSOR OF TATA COFFEE LTD.),KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

68,668/-, which is erroneous and not as per law. 10.0 The Ld. AO has grossly erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act mechanically and without recording any satisfaction for its initiation. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the grounds stated hereinabove either before or at the time

MONIKA MONDAL,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 198/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-2018

270A of Income Tax Act 1961, is initiated for under reporting of income in consequence of misreporting of income on the above issue”. 4. On perusal of the assessment order, ld. PCIT took cognizance under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The copy of the show-cause notice /letter dated 01.02.2022 has been placed on pages

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: the due date of filing of return under Section 139(1) of the Act.

68,81,145/- u/s 37 of the Act. 7.2 We have considered the rival submissions and have also gone through the orders of Ld. AO and Ld. DRP in this regard. We find that the Ld. DRP has given the following directions: “The AO is accordingly directed to allow the said expenditure after due verification that the membership

MECLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act.

68,81,145/- u/s 37 of the Act. 7.2 We have considered the rival submissions and have also gone through the orders of Ld. AO and Ld. DRP in this regard. We find that the Ld. DRP has given the following directions: “The AO is accordingly directed to allow the said expenditure after due verification that the membership

RISHI F.L. ON SHOP,MURSHIDABAD vs. I.T.O., WARD - 42(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2018-19 Rishi F.L. On Shop, Income Tax Officer, 41/1, K.N. Road, Ranibagan, Vs Ward – 42(2), Murshidabad - 742101 Murshidabad-742101 (Pan: Aahfr9315E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 144B of the Act. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: “1. For that the orders passed by the lower authorities are arbitrary, erroneous, without proper reasons, invalid and bad-in-law, to the extent to which they are prejudicial to the interests of the appellant. 2. For that