9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bhattacharjee, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. J P Khaitan, Sr. Adv., Mr. Akhilesh Gupta, Adv., Mrs. Swapna Das, Adv. and Mr. S. Das, Adv. ORDER: The Court :- We have heard learned Counsel on behalf of either sides. This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging the order dated 15.01.2024 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal "B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e objections raised by the assessee to the reason recorded for reopening of the case, before completion of the assessment ? 3. Whether the learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law by not going into the merit of the case, more so in the light of judgment of Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta in the case, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kolkata versus Swati Bajaj reported in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing officer was right in not disposing of the written objection submitted by the assessee for reopening of the assessment. In fact, this ground was canvassed by the assessee before the CIT(A) which call for a remand report but unfortunately the assessing officer did not submit the remand report and the CIT(A) proceeded to take a decision on merits and particularly allowed the appeal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. [supra]. Therefore, the learned Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee's appeal on the said ground. Thus, we find no ground to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the substantial question of law No. 1 is decided against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. Consequently, the three substantial questions of law are left ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
