Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5 vs Manoj Jain
2025 Latest Caselaw 837 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5 vs Manoj Jain on 5 August, 2025

Author: T.S. Sivagnanam

Bench: T.S Sivagnanam

O-6

                         IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                       SPECIAL JURISDICTION [INCOME TAX]
                                  ORIGINAL SIDE


                                    ITAT/294/2024
                                  IA NO: GA/1/2024

              PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5, KOLKATA
                                    VS
                                MANOJ JAIN


BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM
              -A N D-
HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)
DATE : 5th August, 2025.
                                                                                Appearance :
                                                     Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. ...for appellant.

                                                                        Mr. Pranit Bag, Adv.
                                                                      Mr. Anuj Mishra, Adv.
                                                                    Mr. Balaram Patra, Adv.
                                                     Ms. Amani Kayan, Adv. ...for respondent.

The Court :- Reference may be made to the order dated 18th July, 2025 which

reads as follows :-

"The learned Tribunal had set aside the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act was neither physically signed nor digitally signed by the Assessing Officer. In support of the conclusion, the learned Tribunal relied upon a decision of the High Court of Bombay in Prakash Krishnavtar Bhardwaj Vs. Income Tax Officer, reported in (2023) 150 taxmann.com 60 (Bom.).

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee shall verify as towhether the said decision has attained finality and whether any appeal is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court."

Learned advocate appearing for the appellant/department seeks some more

time to get appropriate written instruction from the department. The learned advocate

appearing for the respondent/assessee submitted that they have caused due

verification and have found that no appeal has been preferred by the department

against the judgment in the afore-mentioned matter.

The appeal stands adjourned to enable the learned advocate appearing for the

appellant/department to get written instruction from the department.

The matter stands adjourned.

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ)

(CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.) SM/pkd