Case LawHigh Court › Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ko...

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-1 v. M/S. Veronica Commerce Pvt. Ltd

High Court 31 Oct 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-1 v. M/S. Veronica Commerce Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
31 Oct 2022
Assessment year(s)
2007-08
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-1 v. M/S. Veronica Commerce Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

OD-46 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA/31/2020 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-1 VS. M/S. VERONICA COMMERCE PVT. LTD. BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 31[st] October, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. … for appellant Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. …for respondent The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 28[th] February, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Kolkata, in I.T.A. No. 2445/Kol/2016 for the assessment year 2007-08. The appeal was admitted on 3[rd] March, 2020 on the following substantial questions of law :- “Whether the penalty proceedings under Section 27a(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are invalid if the show-cause notice does not specifically spell out the grounds for imposition of the proposed penalty?” We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing Counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Ms. Swapna Das, learned Advocate, led by Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned senior Counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. On perusal of the order passed by the learned Tribunal, we find that he Tribunal had examined the factual position and found that the show cause notice issued under Section 274 of the Act was defective. The learned Tribunal had also noted various decisions of this Court wherein it has been held that when the notice issued under Section 274 of the Act was defective, the defect is incurable as it goes to the root of the matter. Therefore, we find that the Tribunal rightly granted relief to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The substantial question of law is answered against the revenue. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) S.Pal/SN
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