Case LawHigh Court › Shri Avijit Sarkar v. Income Tax Officer...

Shri Avijit Sarkar v. Income Tax Officer Ward 8(2) Kolkata And Ors

High Court 20 Nov 2023 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Shri Avijit Sarkar v. Income Tax Officer Ward 8(2) Kolkata And Ors
Date of order
20 Nov 2023
Assessment year(s)
2013-14, 2021-22
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Shri Avijit Sarkar v. Income Tax Officer Ward 8(2) Kolkata And Ors, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Sharma to substantiate the case of the department has filed acopy return, on perusal of which it appears that the noticee company haseven filed returns for assessment year 2021-22 and 2022-23 and on the face of it the petitioner has tried to make out a case by suppressing material factand incorrect...

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

ORDER SHEET WPO/1695/2023IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTACONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTIONORIGINAL SIDE SHRI AVIJIT SARKAR VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(2) KOLKATA AND ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN Date: 20[th] November, 2023. Appearance :Mr. Saumya Kejriwal, Adv.Ms. Ananya Rath, Adv.Mr. Navin Mittal, Adv.…for the PetitionerMr. Amit Sharma, Adv.…for the Respondents The Court: Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned orderunder Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to assessment year2013-14 dated 23[rd] May, 2023, on the ground that the impugned proceedingwas initiated against a non-existing company which ceased to exist beingstruck off the register of the Registrar of Companies and the noticee had noexistence at the time of relevant assessment year 2013-14. Mr. Sharma, learned advocate representing the Income Tax Authorityin opposing the writ petition submits that the writ petitioner has madeincorrect statement about its non-existence and has suppressed materialfact and Mr. Sharma to substantiate the case of the department has filed acopy return, on perusal of which it appears that the noticee company haseven filed returns for assessment year 2021-22 and 2022-23 and on the face of it the petitioner has tried to make out a case by suppressing material factand incorrect statement and on this ground, this writ petition being WPO1695 of 2023 is dismissed. TR/ (MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 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