ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, PANAJI, GOA vs. BAGKIYA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD, GOA
The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed in aforestated terms
ITA 148/PAN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Feb 2026AY 2017-18
Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2017-2018 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S M/S Bagkiya Construction Pvt. Ltd. Sf-3, Building No.-3. Techno Cidade, Chogam Rd., Alto Porvorim, Goa-403521. Pan: Aaccb9382M . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: None For The Respondent Revenue By: Mr Senthil Kumar [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 29/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Revenue’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(2) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges The Order Dt. 29/05/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals-2), Panaji [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Wheeled From The Order Dt. 25/08/2021 Passed U/S 147 Of The Act By Acit, Central Circle, Panaji, Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2017-18.[‘Ay’]
For Appellant: None for theFor Respondent: Mr Senthil Kumar [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 127(2)Section 131Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(2)
reassessment proceedings in such a situation was justified.
13. In view of the totally of facts, our observation and in the light of judicial precedent cited above, we find no error in Ld. AO’s action but in the action of Ld.
CIT(A) in vacating the addition, therefore set-aside.
ITAT-Panaji Page 18 of 39
ACIT
