JCIT, (IN-SITU), Circle-4(1), Kolkata Vs. Tezas Trading Company Pvt. Ltd.

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The appeal was preferred by the revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which quashed the assessment order made by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer had made additions to the assessee's income by treating certain commodity trading transactions as bogus and disallowing certain expenses. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the reassessment notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act was barred by limitation. The revenue argued that the notice was valid under the new provisions and guidelines issued by the CBDT. The assessee, on the other hand, argued that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating certain grounds on merits.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding the notice u/s 148 of the IT Act as barred by limitation.
• 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal.
• 3. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the CBDT Instruction No. 01/2022.
• 4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee on merits.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• ITO Ward-42(1), Murshidabad Vs Abhoy Kumar Jain

  Kolkata benchAY 2017-2018Dismissed

• ITO vs. Aggarwal Alloy Steels Pvt Ltd.

  Delhi Bench 'E' benchAY 2013-14Allowed

• Man Mohan Goenka Vs ITO Ward-43(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata benchAY 2017-2018Allowed

• SANJEEV KUMAR AGGARWAL VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 52(1)

  Delhi Bench ‘A’ New Delhi benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Devanand Amarnath Parkar Vs. Income Tax Officer

• Rajroop Doshi Vs. ITO Ward 2(1)

  D Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2017-18Allowed