Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act

M/S Raincom Commodities Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, for statistical purpose, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13

M/S Ruchi Mercandise Private Limied, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, for statistical purpose, appeal of assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13

M/S. Rankini Tracom Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, for statistical purpose, appeal of assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13

M/S. Revive Traders Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 2478/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Revive Traders Pvt. Ltd. ...............................………………………………………....Appellant 15, Sir Hariram Goyanka Street, Kolkata – 700 007 [Pan: Aadcr 6363 F] I.T.O. Ward 12(2) Kolkata,...................……………………………………………..........Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: None Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Imlimeren Jamir, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 05, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 07, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 16, Kolkata Dated 30.10.2017 Passed Ex-Parte Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Before Him. 2. The Assessee In The Present Is A Company Which Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Originally On 26.03.2011 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 11,007/-. The Said Return Was Initially Processed By The A.O. Under Section 143(1)(A) Of The Act On 04.06.2011. The Assessment However Was Subsequently Reopened By Him On The Basis Of Certain Information Gathered During The Course Of Search & Seizure Action Conducted In The Badalia Group Of Cases & After Recording The Reasons, A Notice Under Section 148 Was Issued By Him On 11.09.2012. Although There Was No Response Initially By The Assessee To The Said Notice Issued By A Fixture, The Authorised

M/S Sao Finance & Properties (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-2(2)Kol., Kolkata

In the result, for statistical purpose, appeal of assessee stands allowed

Vivek Barter Pvt.Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata

In the result, for statistical purpose, appeal of assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Vivek Barter Pvt Ltd. V/S. Income Tax Officer, 32, Ezra Street, 4Th Floor, Ward-5(4), 8Th Floor, Room No.403, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Kolkata-001 Chowringhee Square, [Pan No.Aaacv 8952 B] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Sunil Surana, Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arindam Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 27-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28-02-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 06.12.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Ito Ward-5(4), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 20.03.2015 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Grounds As Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under:- “1. For That The L. Cit(A) Erred In Deciding The Appeal X Parte Without Allowing The Appellant Any Proper & Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard & In Fact The Last Notice Issued For Hearing On 1.12.2016 Was Never Served On The Appellant. 2. For That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Is Bad In Law Since The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Decided The Issues Ground-Wise In Respect Of The Grounds Raised By The Appellant In The Memo Of Appeal. 3. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Is Bad In Law Since The Order Passed Is Not Any Speaking Order Nor The Cit(A) Has Looked Into The Assessment Records & Relevant Materials To Conclude That The Order Of The Ld. Ao Cannot Be Interfered With.

Divya Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO(Tech), Kolkata

In the result, for statistical purpose, appeal of assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Divya Electronics Pvt. V/S. Income Tax Officer Ltd., 32 Ezra Street, 4Th (Tech-2), 3Rd Floor, Floor, Room No.404, Aaykar Bhawan, Kolkata-001 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aaacd 9721 C] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Sunil Surana, Fca, अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arindam Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 27-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28-02-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Kolkata Dated 25.11.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Ito(Tech-2), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 29.03.2015 For Assessment Year 2012-13.Grounds Raised By Assessee Are Reproduced Below:- “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deciding The Appeal Ex Parte Without Allowing The Appellant Any Proper & Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard. 2. For That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Is Bad In Law Since The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Decided The Issues Ground-Wise In Respect Of The Grounds Raised By The Appellant In The Memo Of Appeal. 3. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Is Bad In Law Since The Order Passed Is Not Any Speaking Order Nor The Cit(A) Has Looked Into The Assessment Records & Relevant Materials To Conclude That The Order Of The Ld. Ao Cannot Be Interfered With. 4. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Is Not Maintainable.