COMNET RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 6(1),, KOLKATA

IN THE INCOMETAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA Before ShriRajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and ShriPradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No.2622/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Commet Resources Private Limited.....................................................................Appellant 4th Floor, Front Building, 12/1, Lindsay Street, Kolkata- 700087, [PAN No. AABCC8620Q] Vs. ITO, Ward 6(1), ..…………..…………………....……….Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- 700069, Appearances by: Sri. Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Adv. appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Sri. Sanjib Kumar Paul, Addl. Sr. DR , appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing :Jan. 19, 2026 Date of pronouncing theorder :April 21 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.10.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) passed under Section 147r.w.s.144 of the Assessment Year 2019-20 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. The brief facts of the case of the assessee is that assessee is a private limited company engaged in wholesale business of computer networking, hardware and accessories. The company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2019-20 declaring total income at Rs. 61,02,050/-.Notice U/s 148A(b) was issued alleging that assessee has taken bogus loan of Rs. 20,00,000/- during the financial year 2018-19 from M/s Shrey Finance and Investment Private Limited alleged to be a shell company, in response to the same, the assessee furnished reply

ITA No.2622/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2019-20 and documentary evidences but the Ld. JAO(Judicial Assessing Officers) was not satisfied and the case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued. Statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) was issued and in response to the same, assessee filed all the details and submission. The Ld. AR after going over the documents and submission made by the assessee made an addition of Rs. 22,13,633/- an unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) where in appeal of the assessee has been dismissed. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR challenges the very impugned order thereby submitting that before the Assssing Officer,assessee has filed all the necessary documents relating to the loan taken and, in this way, he discharged its onus of proving the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the loan taken. The Ld. AR submits that AO merely relying on the information available made addition of Rs. 22,13,633/-as unexplained cash credit U/s 68 of the Income Tax Act ignoring the fact that the said amount of Rs. 22,136,33/- included interest of Rs. 2,13,633/- which was paid by the assessee and could not have been treated as credit received u/s 68 that goes to establish that there is a complete non-application of mind of the AO. The Ld. AR further submits that assessee had repaidthe loan in the next financial year. The Ld. AR filed the bank statement of ComnetResource Private ltd. for the assessment year 2019-20, ledger of M/s Shrey Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd and audited financial statement of Assessee. The Ld. AR has also placed his reliance on the order passed by the Kolkata High Court which is as follows:-

ITA No.2622/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2019-20

Contrary to that Ld. DR supports the impugned order.

ITA No.2622/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2019-20 5. Acknowledgement, Audited Balance Sheet, statement of P&L with notes thereon, NBFC Certificate, Bank Statement, source of funds of loan creditor company The ledger copy of M/s Shrey Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd and the bank statement of the assessee established this contention of the assessee that loan has been taken trough proper channels and that has been repaid by the assessee, the next financial year.

This appeal filed by the Income Tax Department under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated December 14, 2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal "A" Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) in ITA No. 908/Kol/2023 for the assessment year 2015-16. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : i) Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the disallowance made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of unsecured loan from shell companies amounting to Rs.3,00,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit without appreciating the materials brought on record and facts evaluated by the Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order ? ii) Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the addition made under Section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of interest expenses on such unsecured loan ? We have heard Mr. Tilak Sharma, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Amit Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. The Department was unsuccessful in their challenge before the learned Tribunal wherein they questioned the correctness of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 27, Kolkata [CIT(A)] on 14 th June, 2023. By the said order, the [CIT(A)]

ITA No.2622/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2019-20 allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and set aside the addition made by the Assessing Officer by invoking power under Section 68 of the Act. As could be seen from the order passed by the learned Tribunal, the Tribunal has examined the factual details after noting the factual findings recorded by the [CIT(A)], more importantly, the learned Tribunal found that all the loans stood repaid, which has also been factually ascertained by the [CIT(A)] and re- affirmed by the Tribunal. We find the order passed by the [CIT(A)] to be an elaborate order after discussing all the facts. The learned Tribunal has, in fact, quoted the relevant portions of the order passed by the [CIT(A)] and thereafter independently proceeded to examine the correctness of the finding and affirmed the same. Thus, we are of the view that no questions of law, much less substantial questions of law arises for consideration in this appeal. Hence, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. Going over the discussion made above and considering the judicial 5. pronouncements we find merit in the contention of the assessee and accordingly delete the addition of Rs. 22,13,633/- as unexplained Cash credit U/s 68 of the Income Tax Act.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Kolkata, the 21st April , 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member

DC Dated:. 21 .04.2026.

ITA No.2622/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2019-20 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches