• Direct Tax
  • Indirect Tax
  • Corporate Law
  • Services
  • Consultation
  • Templates
  • Courses
  • Plans

Categories

Direct Tax
Indirect Tax
Corporate Law

Quick links

  • Services
  • Consultation
  • Templates
  • Courses
  • Plans
Direct Tax
|
  • Judgements
  • Blogs

For any queries, concerns or feedback, please connect with us at:

contact@counselvise.com
+91 97234 00220
Direct Tax
  • Judges
  • Assessee
  • Blogs
  • Judgements
Indirect Tax
  • Judges
  • Assessee
  • Blogs
  • Judgements
Corporate Law
  • Judges
  • Assessee
  • Blogs
  • Judgements
Other Links
  • Services
  • Consultation
  • Templates
  • Terms and conditions
  • Contact us
  • Support
  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Refund Policy
  • Delivery Policy
Subscribe to our newsletter


Crafted Mindfully at
© 2026 COUNSELVISE
  1. direct tax
  2. /
  3. judgements
Judges
Appeal Type

Others

Bench
Assessment Year

misc

Result in Favour of

Others

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 13, Kolkata V. Umang Nemani

ITAT/176/2025

misc

Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2026

Result: Others

4
Appeal details
RSA Number
[2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 832714 (HC-KOLKATA)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Others
Pronouncement Date
19-01-2026
Appeal Filed By
Order Result
Bench Allotted
Next Hearing Date
-
Assessment Year
misc
Appeal Filed On
-
Judgement Text
"OD 3 ITAT/176/2025 IA NO: GA/2/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE PRICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 13, KOLKATA VS UMANG NEMANI BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ -AND- The Hon’ble JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR Date: 19th January, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kr. Agrahari, Adv. . . .for the appellant. Mr. Saurabh Bagaria, Adv. Ms. Sweta Mohanty, Adv. . . .for the respondent. The Court: The affidavit of service filed in the Court has been duly examined and is hereby formally taken on record. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the tax effect involved in the present case is reported to be Rs.1,57,47,303/-. It is emphasized that this amount is below the monetary threshold specified for filing an appeal before this Court, as outlined in Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17th September 2024. The counsel further contends, however, that despite the tax effect being below Printed from counselvise.com 2 the prescribed limit, the present matter nonetheless falls within the scope of an exception carved out in Clause 3.1(h) of Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15th March 2024. This exception, as interpreted in conjunction with Circular No. 9/2024, pertains to cases where the issues involved are of substantial legal importance or involve questions of law that merit consideration irrespective of the monetary threshold. The learned counsel advances several substantial questions of law for the Court’s consideration, which are as follows: i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in law in quashing the reopening proceeding under Section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; ii) Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error of law in ignoring the direct and circumstantial evidences which were brought on record by the Assessing Officer to establish that the assessee had arranged an accommodation entry by way of loan from M/s Beejay Invest & Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd. whose creditworthiness has not been proved, to evade his tax liability? iii) Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error of law in ignoring the direct and circumstantial evidences which were brought on record by the Printed from counselvise.com 3 Assessing Officer to establish that the credit namely M/s Beejay Invest & Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd. which is an NBFC, failed to provide any agreement, terms and conditions of loan, security or mortgage or hypothecation of any asset/property advancing loan to the assessee and thus the said loan transaction is not genuine? iv) Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error of law in ignoring the facts brought on record by the Assessing Officer that the loan creditor namely M/s Beejay Invest & Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd. had no capacity to extend loans and the said company was just a paper company and therefore all the transactions were not genuine? v) Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in deciding an issue which was not raised by the assessee by way of ground of appeal either before the CIT (Appeals) or the Learned Tribunal viz ground of validity of reopening of the assessment? After carefully hearing the submissions made by the appellant and thoroughly perusing the Tribunal’s order along with the assessment records, this Court observes that the present appeal does not fall within the scope of the exception clause outlined in Clause 3.1 of Circular No.5 of 2024 dated 15th March, 2024. The Court notes that the issues raised do not pertain to questions Printed from counselvise.com 4 of substantial legal importance that would warrant an exception under the circular’s provisions. Consequently, the Court finds that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this matter. Accordingly, the appeal along with the connected application, is hereby dismissed. (RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.) (UDAY KUMAR, J.) SP/ Printed from counselvise.com "
Judges
Appeal Type

Others

Bench
Assessment Year

misc

Result in Favour of

Others

1-to-1

1:1 Consultation on Legal Requirements
dummy

Kashish Poojara

₹1

PAID

Social Media Brand Kit
₹100
Corporate Law (NCLT)
₹4000 for a year

Direct Tax

No Tax Exemption for Tiger Global on Flipkart Stake Sale
dummy

Team Counselvise - January 17, 2026