Ita/115/2019 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Kolkata v. The Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd
High Court
16 Mar 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Ita/115/2019 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Kolkata v. The Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd
Date of order
16 Mar 2023
Assessment year(s)
2014-15
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/115/2019 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Kolkata v. The Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Thus following the said decision in ITAT/174/2021 the appeal filed by therevenue is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against therevenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
OD–1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE
ITA/115/2019PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATAVS.THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.
BEFORE :THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : 16[th] March, 2023
Appearance :Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv.…for appellantMr. Abhijit Chatterjee, Adv.Mr. Gopal Ram Sharma, Adv.…for respondent
The Court : - This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act (the Act) is directed against the order dated 18.3.2016 passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 873/Kol/2013 for the Assessmentyear 2009-2010. The appeal was admitted on 27[th] August, 2019 on the followingsubstantial question of law :-
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances fo the case, the learned tribunalerred in law in allowing an addition of Rs.5,44,74,963/- which was disallowed bythe assessing officer under section 14A of the Income Tax Act read with Rule 8Dof the Income Tax Act?”
We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing Counsel for the appellant andMr. Abhijit Chatterje, learned senior Counsel duly assisted by Mr. Gopal Ram Sharma,learned Advocate for the respondent/assessee.
We need not labour much to decide substantial question of law framed forconsideration as in the assessee’s own case in ITAT/174/2021 for the assessment year
2014-15 the very same substantial question of law was considered and by judgmentdated 12.09.2022 the appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed. In the said appealthere were six substantial questions of law and the third substantial question of law isidentical to the substantial question of law framed in the case on hand.
Thus following the said decision in ITAT/174/2021 the appeal filed by therevenue is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against therevenue.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
pkd/GH
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.