Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 2583 Cal/2
Judgement Date : 27 September, 2022
OD - 7
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)
ORIGINAL SIDE
ITAT/154/2022
IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASANSOL
VS.
M/S. EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD.
BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
And
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA
Date : SEPTEMBER 27, 2022.
Appearance:
Mr. Prithu Dhudheria, Adv.
... for appellant
Mr. Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, Adv.
...for respondent.
GA/1/2022
The Court :- We have heard Mr. Prithu Dhudheria, learned standing Counsel
appearing for the appellant and Mr. Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, learned Counsel for the
respondent.
There is a delay of 482 days in filing the appeal. On perusal of the application we
are satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown for not being able to prefer the appeal
within the period of limitation. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly,
the application for condonation of delay is allowed.
ITAT/154/2022
This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(the Act) is directed against the order dated October 22, 2020 passed by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal 'B' Bench Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA No. 1358/Kol/2018 for the
assessment year 2005-2006. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions
of law for consideration :
[a] Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in affirming the decision of the
Learned CIT[A], Asansol deleting the addition made on account of
disallowance of " Provision for Wages and Salary etc. on account of NCWA
VII" amounting to Rs.5,25,00,00,000/- in absence of verifiable supporting
evidences ?
[b] Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in affirming the decision of the
learned CIT[A], Asansol deleting the addition made on account of
disallowance of "Current Liabilities" amounting to Rs.1,22,06,16,000/-
relying on the presumption that the assessee being PSU, cannot create a
fictitious liability in the books ?
We have heard Mr. Prithu Dhudheria, learned standing Counsel appearing for the
appellant and Mr. Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, learned Counsel for the respondent.
So far as substantial question of law [a] is concerned, the same has been decided
against the revenue in the assessee's own case by this Court in ITAT/230/2017 dated
14.12.2021 and in the same judgment substantial question of law [b] was also decided
against the revenue.
So far as the substantial question of law no.[b] is concerned, the same issue arose
in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2006-2007 in ITAT/96/2018 and by
judgment dated 04.01.2022 the appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed.
Thus, following the above decisions, the appeal stands dismissed and the
substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue.
Consequently, the connected application for stay stands closed.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
(SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA, J.)
Pkd/SPal
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!