Case Law › High Court › Itat/170/2025 Ia No: Ga/1/2025 Abdul Man...

Itat/170/2025 Ia No: Ga/1/2025 Abdul Mannan v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 32(3), Kolkata

High Court 09 Sep 2025 In favour of: Unclear

Forum / Bench

High Court · calcutta_original_side

Parties

Date of order

09 Sep 2025

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Other

Case summary

In Itat/170/2025 Ia No: Ga/1/2025 Abdul Mannan v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 32(3), Kolkata, the High Court (2025) decided the matter.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/170/2025 IA NO: GA/1/2025 ABDUL MANNAN VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 32(3), KOLKATA BEFORE : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM -A N D- HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS) DATE : 12[th] September, 2025 Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. …for respondent The Court : This matter has been listed in the supplementary list today for incorporating certain correction in the appearance portion of our order dated 9[th] September, 2025. It has been pointed out by Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, learned Advocate for the respondent that his name has been omitted to be recorded in the appearance portion of the said order. Let the name of “Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Advocate for the respondent” be inserted in the appearance portion of the order dated 9[th]September, 2025. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ. ) (CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)

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.