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.

39 results for “section 68”+ Section 433clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi308Karnataka293Mumbai269Chennai108Ahmedabad83Bangalore66Kolkata39Jaipur36Allahabad31Raipur28Cuttack19Pune18Hyderabad16Indore14Surat14Lucknow12Visakhapatnam10Chandigarh10Amritsar10Dehradun7Telangana6Guwahati5Rajkot4Nagpur4Varanasi4SC3Panaji3Jodhpur2Ranchi2Andhra Pradesh1Cochin1Patna1Orissa1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 26330Section 80I28Section 143(3)27Section 6825Addition to Income25Section 14721Disallowance14Section 14813Section 14412Section 250

KUNJ ALLOYS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. A.C.I.T., CIR-2, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 239/CTK/2007[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

section 68 for the following reasons given in paragraph no. 5.3 of his impugned order:- “5.3. I have carefully looked into the facts of the case and the submissions made before me. It is very much clear from the perusal of material available on record that all the 8 companies who had applied for allotment of shares

ITO, WD-5(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PURBASA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1179/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2008-09 Income Tax Officer, V/S. M/S Purbasa Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 5/5 Clive Row, 4Th Ward-5(2), P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Room No.26, 8Th Floor, Room No.6, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No.Aaecp 1267B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 15-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 25-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2015, Passed In Case No.1575/Cit(A)-2/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S. 144 R.W.S 263 R.W.S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Ground Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Revere The Cit(A)’S Action Deleting Unexplained Cash Credits Addition Of ₹3.14 Lac Made In The Course Of Assessment Framed On 19.03.2015. The Assessee’S Case Before Assessing Officer Was That This Sum Represented Its Share Application / Premium Raised During The Course Of Relevant Previous Year. The Assessing Officer Held In The Course Of Assessment That Assessee Had Failed To Prove Identity, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Investors

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

11
Deduction10
Limitation/Time-bar7
Section 144Section 68

Section 68 the assessment was made on this sum. The IT AT noted that the assessed was a Public. Limited Company which had received subscriptions to the public issue through banking channels and the shares were allotted in consonance with the provisions of the Securities Contract Regulation Act, 1956 as also the Rules & Regulations of the Delhi Stock Exchange

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SALASAR FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1926/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1926/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 131Section 250

433/- Rs.63,00,000/- Ltd. 3. Ritesh Nirman Pvt. Rs 13,48,25,960.13 Rs.99,79,342/- Rs.1,48,00,000/- Ltd. 4. Ritesh Projects Pvt. Rs 11,66,59,890.46 Rs.1,46,71,605/- Rs.35,00,000/- Ltd. 5. Ritesh Vinimay Pvt. Rs 6,09,27,413.30 Rs.33,82,795/- Rs.31,00,000/- Ltd. 9.2. Regarding the genuineness

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

D.CI.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S IMPEX FERRO TECH LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1521/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144CSection 145(3)Section 250

68 of the Act on account of share application money received from three promoter group companies and two non-promoter group companies solely on the ground of the appellant's alleged failure to establish the genuineness of transaction, although he did not dispute the identity and creditworthiness of those share investors. 2. That, the Ld. CIT(A) further erred

M/S IMPEX FERRO TECH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.CI.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1640/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144CSection 145(3)Section 250

68 of the Act on account of share application money received from three promoter group companies and two non-promoter group companies solely on the ground of the appellant's alleged failure to establish the genuineness of transaction, although he did not dispute the identity and creditworthiness of those share investors. 2. That, the Ld. CIT(A) further erred

SRI KALYAN SARKAR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-54(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 371/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68. In that view of the matter, I confirm the addition made on this issue and dismiss ground no.3 of the assessee’s appeal. 9. As regards the issue involved in ground no.5 relating to the addition of Rs.49,800/- made on account of low withdrawals, it is observed that the withdrawals for household and personal expenses during

RAGHVENDRA PRATAP SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 28, KOLKATA

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

ITA 612/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 40Section 69C

section 68. (b) For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in holding that the addition made erroneously u/s 68 by the A.O. was liable to be added u/s 41(1) of the Act. 9.The appellant craves leave to add further grounds of appeal or alter the grounds at the time of hearing. 4. ld. Counsel

ACIT, CIRCLE-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. G. D. CONSTRUCTION & CO., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1596/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 144

433, wherein it is held that “if the assessee failed to produce acceptable accounts revenue would be on the decision of Royal medial Hall vs. CIT (1962) 46 ITR 748 (AP) wherein it is held that “estimate of income on the basis of materials available and the past assessment record was held proper” and Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer

SUNIL AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1397/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shris.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Dr.A.L. Saini, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: ShriA.K.Tibrewal–FCAFor Respondent: ShriSnehanshu Biswas-JCIT-SR DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 68

68 of the Act, specifically mentioned that neither did he give her name Sunil Agarwal A.Y. 10-11 to the assessee nor alleged that he or the assessee deposited cash in her bank account. 7. That the Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, erred in disallowing the sum of Rs.1,41,360 by wrongly alleging that thee was no nexus

M/S. COLOUR REALTORS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 31/KOL/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 31/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Colour Realtors Private Limited Income Tax Officer, Ward- 85, Bentick Street Vs 2(2), Kolkata 5Th Floor Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcc9668G] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.M. Roy, A/R Revenue By : Shri S. Datta, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/11/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 16/11/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Order Of The Ld Cit(A) Is Unjustified & Bad In Law As Ld Cit(A) Has Failed To Fulfil Its Statutory Obligations By Not Considering The Facts & Merits Of The Case While Disposing Off The Appeal. 2. For That The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Passing The Order Without Giving Any Opportunity To The Assessee For Making Its Submission & Also Failed To Serve The Notices On The Assessee Since No Intimation Of The Notices Was Sent To Assessee Over E-Mail Or Sms. 3. For That Ld. Ao Erred In Treating The Genuine Purchases Of The Assessee As Bogus & Making Addition Of Rs. 49,26,85,000 As Bogus Purchase U/S 68. For That Ld. Ao Erred In Treating The Amount Of Sundry Creditors Of Rs. 14,16,17,433 As Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68. 4. For That Ld. Ao Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 14A Read With Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & In Disallowing An Amount Of Rs. 22,150. 5. For That The Appellant Craves Leaves To Add, Alter Or Amend Any Ground Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Roy, A/RFor Respondent: Shri S. Datta, CIT D/R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

433 as unexplained Cash Credit u/s 68. 4. For that Ld. AO erred in invoking the provisions of Section

M/S IMPLEX FERRO TECH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 292/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

68 of the Act and also added a sum of ₹9,89,506/- as share issue expenses deducted by the assessee company. The Ld. AO assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹36,54,75,680/- u/s 143(3) of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who examined

M/S IMPLEX FERRO TECH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 293/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

68 of the Act and also added a sum of ₹9,89,506/- as share issue expenses deducted by the assessee company. The Ld. AO assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹36,54,75,680/- u/s 143(3) of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who examined

M/S. CLIFF TREXIM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2520/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

433 (SC) wherein their Lordships observed as under (page 438 of 6 RC) : "The Revenue has preferred an appeal from the order of the Tribunal setting aside the imposition of penalty under rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal has set aside the order of the Commissioner on the ground that neither the show-cause notice

M/S. SPAN FOUNDATION PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2521/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

433 (SC) wherein their Lordships observed as under (page 438 of 6 RC) : "The Revenue has preferred an appeal from the order of the Tribunal setting aside the imposition of penalty under rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal has set aside the order of the Commissioner on the ground that neither the show-cause notice

M/S. GARG BROTHERS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2519/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

433 (SC) wherein their Lordships observed as under (page 438 of 6 RC) : "The Revenue has preferred an appeal from the order of the Tribunal setting aside the imposition of penalty under rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal has set aside the order of the Commissioner on the ground that neither the show-cause notice

GIRIDHARIMAL BHANWARLAL,COOCHBIHAR vs. ITO, WARD - 1, COOCHBEHAR, COOCHBIHAR

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 929/KOL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri .M.Balaganesh & Shri.S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 147Section 40A(3)

433/- 2006-07 Rs.9,68,280/- Rs.1,93,656/- Rs.1,32,460/- 11. On appeal by the Assessee, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. Before CIT(A) the Assessee submitted that the seized documents by mistake contains a reference to the name of the Assessee’s firm and that the real person to whom reference was made

MANISH PARASRAMPURIA,KOLKATA vs. A.O., NFAC / D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-43, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 654/KOL/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 68

68 of the I. T. Act, 1961 and added back to total income of the assessee for the previous year relevant to A.Y.2015-16 and tax has been computed as per provisions of section 115 BBE of the Act at the higher rate.” 4.3. Subsequently, case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act by recording the reasons

M/S. SALARPURIA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 2094/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 115JSection 234CSection 801Section 80I

68,352/- which was not allowed in the assessment, instead of issuing a clear direction to the A.O to straightway allow the TDS credit of Rs. 8,30,070/- at least on the basis of the TDS certificates and other relevant papers filed before him identifying which particular TDS amounts were disallowed in the assessment. 4. For that in view

M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS TCG LIFESCIENCES LTD.,),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2261/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

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

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148

section applies to a undertaking only when it manufactures or produces any articles or things or computer software. In the column 8 of the 3CD report nature of business of the assessee was shown as 'analysis & synthesis of chemical compounds and data processing'. In the Form No. 56G Export Turnover as well as domestic turnover of the assessee