Calcutta High Court
Jankalyan Vinimay Pvt. Ltd vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 6 November, 2024
Author: T.S. Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S. Sivagnanam, Hiranmay Bhattacharyya
1
OD 42
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)
ORIGINAL SIDE
ITAT/179/2024
IA NO: GA/1/2024
JANKALYAN VINIMAY PVT. LTD.
VS.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1)
BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
And
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Date : 6th November, 2024
Appearance :
Mr. Sourav Bagaria, Adv.
Mr. Rites Goel, Adv.
...for Appellant
The Court : This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 7 th February,
2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "B" Bench, Kolkata (the
Tribunal) in ITA No. 776/Kol/2022 for the assessment year 2019-20.
The assessee has raised the following substantial questions of law for
consideration:
(i) Whether at the time of issuance of an assessment order under
Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 an issue which was
covered against the revenue by the judgment of the jurisdictional
2
High Court in the case Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vijay Shree
Limited (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Cal) at the said time be
ignored and the disallowance be made with respect of such an
issue ?
(ii) Whether the disallowance of the claim made under section
36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 could have been made in an
assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act especially
when the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax v. Alom
Extrusions Limited (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) and Commissioner of
Income Tax v. Vijay Shree Limited (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396
(Cal) held the field and the same were against the revenue
department ?
(iii) Whether the amendments made by the Finance Act, 2021 by
insertion of Explanation 2 to Section 36(1)(va) and by insertion of
Explanation 5 to Section 43B are prospective in nature and not
applicable to assessment year 2019-20?
(iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the instant case the
Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in not
considering the fact that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. reported in
2022(448) ITR 518 (SC) is applicable prospectively and not
applicable to Assessment Year 2019-20?
3
(v) Whether the disallowance of Rs.1,77,55,593/- is erroneous,
contrary to law and the findings and observations in the order of
the authorities below are perverse?
The stay application GA 1 of 2024 stands disposed of.
Though the stay application is formally disposed of, the same shall
however be retained with the records and be treated as an informal paper book
in this appeal.
List the appeal for hearing after six weeks.
Since the respondent is not represented by their learned Advocate, the
learned Advocate for the appellant is directed to serve notice of this appeal on
the respondent.
We direct Mr. Om Narayan Rai, learned senior standing counsel, who
normally represents the revenue/department to accept notice on behalf of the
respondent/department and his appearance be regularised.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ.)
(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
SN./S.Das
AR(CR)
