Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata-1 v....

Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata-1 v. M/S. Caledonian Jute &Industries Ltd

High Court 20 Dec 2023 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata-1 v. M/S. Caledonian Jute &Industries Ltd
Date of order
20 Dec 2023
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kolkata-1 v. M/S. Caledonian Jute &Industries Ltd, the High Court (2023) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

OD-14 ITA/55/2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (Income Tax)ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOLKATA-1 -Versus- M/S. CALEDONIAN JUTE &INDUSTRIES LTD. BEFORE :THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANIAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJDate : 20[th] December, 2023 Appearance:Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, Adv.…for the appellant Mr. Anil Kumar Dugar, Adv.Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee, Adv....for the respondents.. The Court : Heard Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, learnedstanding counsel for the appellant and Mr. Anil Kumar Dugar,learned Advocate for the respondent/assessee.As per the assessment order, the net loss disclosed bythe assessee was Rs.2,85,65,601/- which was reduced and allowedat Rs.1,41,14,285/-. Thus the differential loss ofRs.1,44,51,316/- was disallowed. The CIT (Appeals) allowed theappeal of the assessee. The revenue filed appeal before theTribunal which was dismissed. Thus, the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal both recorded concurrent findings of fact to upholdthe disclosed loss of the assessee. That apart, the lossdisallowed by the assessing officer was only about Rs.1.45crores. The tax burden thereon would be less than the limitprescribed for filing of appeals by the Income Tax Departmentin terms of the Circular No.17/2019 dated 8[th] August, 2019.In view of the aforesaid, the appeal (ITA/55/2014) isdismissed as the tax effect involved is below the limitprescribed under the aforesaid circular. (SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, J.) (RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.) As.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan