Case LawHigh Court › Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-17,...

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-17, Kolkata v. M/S. Radhashyam Tirthabasi Paul

High Court 17 Jan 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-17, Kolkata v. M/S. Radhashyam Tirthabasi Paul
Date of order
17 Jan 2022
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-17, Kolkata v. M/S. Radhashyam Tirthabasi Paul, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Recording the said submission, the appeal stands dismissed on the ground of low tax effect.

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-19 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA 106 of 2018 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-17, KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. RADHASHYAM TIRTHABASI PAUL BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM AND The Hon’ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 17[th] January, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Debasish Chowdhury, Adv. …for the appellant. The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata. The learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue has given instructions to the effect that this appeal cannot be prosecuted by the appellant/revenue on the ground of low tax effect. Recording the said submission, the appeal stands dismissed on the ground of low tax effect. Consequently, substantial questions of law which have been raised are left open. (T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, 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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan