JIWAN GOURI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), KOLKATA

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA �ी राजेशकुमार, लेखा सट�य एवं �ी �द�प कुमार चौबे, �या�यक सद�यके सम� [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A No. 76/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AAECS 6636 F) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / I.T.A No. 77/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Coronation Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AABCC 0753 C) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / I.T.A No. 78/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Krypton Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AABCK 1340 H) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / I.T.A No. 79/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Syncox Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

2 I.TA. Nos.76 to 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

(PAN: AAECS 6633 A) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / I.T.A No. 80/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Panchanan Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AABCP 8485 G) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / I.T.A No. 81/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Sati Development Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AAECS 0173 P) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / I.T.A No. 82/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Tasu Estate Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AABCT 2180 Q) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant /

3 I.TA. Nos.76 to 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. I.T.A No. 83/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Multitech Merchandise pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AACCM 1802 D) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / I.T.A No. 84/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Trilok Commercial Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AABCT 1607 J) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / I.T.A No. 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Jiwan Gouri Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Kolkata

(PAN: AAACJ 8359 G) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant /

Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 21.04.2026 क� �त�थ Date of Pronouncement/ 02.06.2026 आदेश उ�घोषणा क� �त�थ For the Appellant/ Shri A. K. Tibriwal, FCA �नधा�रती क� ओर से Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate

4 I.TA. Nos.76 to 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. For the Respondent/ Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT Sr. राज�व क� ओर से DR

ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: These are the appeals preferred by the different assessees against the separate orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 12.11.2024, 13.11.2024, 13.11.2024, 13.11.2024, 13.11.2024, 11.11.2024, 13.11.2024, 13.11.2024, 13.11.2024, 13.11.2024 for the AY 2021-22. Since the issue involved in all these appeals are similar , therefore all these appeals are being decided by this common order for the sake brevity and convenience. First we shall adjudicate in ITA No. 76/Kol/2025 for AY 2021-22.

5 I.TA. Nos.76 to 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. BP although no corresponding adjustment was made in the schedule capital gain. The said amount of Rs. 41,41,750/- is the amount of sale consideration of flat sold during the year which has been reflected in the profit and loss account and the said income has been disclosed as part of profits declared under the head business and profession. The assessee without prejudice submitted that the AO CPC, Bangalore failed to consider the reply of the assessee dated 21.04.2022 in response to notice of adjustment issued u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. It was submitted that due to conversion of capital assets into stock in trade, deemed long term capital gain of Rs. 1,71,71,108/- u/s 45(2) has arisen. As the said income is the deemed income, it is not reflected in the turnover of Rs. 41,14,750/- but it is included in the profit and loss account under closing stock. Hence reduced in Schedule BP and shown under Schedule capital gain in the computation.

Deemed sale Consideration of Flats and Car Parking Space : Rs. 1,97,95,147/- Less: Cost of Land with Structures : Rs. 22,08,610/- Less: Cost of Improvement : Rs. 4,15,429/- Deemed Capital Gain Rs. 1,71,71,108/- The said amount of deemed Capital Gain of Rs. 1,71,71,108 arose on account of conversion of Capital asset of Rs 26,24,039 [Rs.22,08,610 + Rs.4,15,429) into Stock in trade at the Value of Rs. 1,97,95, 147. The said deemed Capital Gain was included in the Assessee's

6 I.TA. Nos.76 to 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. proportionate share in the FMV of Land which was valued at Rs.1,93,79,718. The calculation of Capital Gain declared in the return of Income is as under: "Fair Market Value of Flats and Car Parking : Rs.1,93,79,718 **Less Index Cost of Acquisition : Rs.1,82,56,144 Rs. 11,23,574 Note: The said value, being Assessee's share in the land, is determined as per Govt. Valuer Report dated 24.02.2021. **Note: The indexed cost of Acquisition of Rs. 1,82,56, 144 was wrongly disallowed by Ld. CIT(A), as the Income declared under the Head "Capital Gain" was not the subject matter of adjustment under section 143(1)(a) and adjustment was only in respect of the issue "Business & Profession". Thus, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in disallowing the claim of Indexed Cost of Acquisition. Thus, there was no mistake in the Schedule BP as the amount of Capital Gain was. correctly disclosed. Without Prejudice to the above submissions, the Appellant states and submits that the facts and the reply filed as above shows that the adjustment made was not in the nature as contemplated under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Modern Fibotex India Limited vs DCIT [1995] 212 ITR 496 (Cal), Khatau Junkar Ltd. v. K.S. Pathania (1992) 196 ITR 55, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. 6. After considering the fact of the case inkling written submissions of the assessee, We are of the considered view that the issue involved in these appeals is a debatable issue and can not be subject matter of adjustments u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. The case of the assessee squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Modern Fibotex India Limited vs DCIT [1995] 212 ITR 496 (Cal) wherein the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has discussed the scope of Section 143(1)(a) as under:

"The jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer under section 143(1)(a) to make an adjustment and to issue an intimation is, in my view, limited not only to the obvious but also to that which is deducible from the return as filed, without doubt or debate. This is clear from the language of the section and is supported by the authority as well as the circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes in this connection. 7. In the case of Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. [2018] 93 taxmann.com 63 (Bombay) Hon'ble Bombay High Court has also held as thus:

7 I.TA. Nos.76 to 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. "9. Further, our Court in Khatau Junkar Ltd. (supra) had while dealing with the word "prima facie inadmissible" in clause (Ui) of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act has held that the word "prima facie" means on the face of it the claim is not admissible. It means the claim does not require any further inquiry before disallowing the claim. The Court observed that where a claim has been made which requires further inquiry, it cannot be disallowed without hearing the parties and / or giving the party an opportunity to submit proof in support of its claim. In the absence of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act being read in the above manner i.e. debatable issues cannot be adjusted by way of intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, would lead to arbitrary and unreasonable intimations being issued leading to chaos." Similarly the coordinate bench in the case of Rajiv Pujara Vs DCIT, ITA No. 239/Kol/2025 A.Y. 2017-18 , has held that if there is disagreement , the issue becomes debatable and therefore adjustments can not be made u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act . The relevant findings of the coordinate bench are extracted below:

“5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in para 6 shows that the Ld. CIT(A) has taken a stand that the Form 26AS statement had primacy over the Form 16 which is not correct. In an intimation u/s 143(1), there is no question of the primacy either of Form 26AS or Form 16. The provisions of Section 143(1) are very explicit in regard to what are the adjustments that are permissible in an intimation u/s 143(1). Admittedly, before issuance of intimation u/s 143(1) a notice has been issued to the assessee and the assessee has also responded to the same by disagreeing with the communication and its proposed adjustment. Once, there is a disagreement, the issue become a debatable issue and admittedly, such adjustment cannot be made in an intimation u/s 143(1) AS the adjustments made in the intimation itself are debatable issue, we are of the view that the intimation issued in the case of the assessee itself is unsustainable and the same is liable to be quashed and we do so.” 8. Similarly in another decision in the case of Jai Kumar Kankaria Vs ACIT ITA No. 556/Kol/2024 A.Y. 2018-19 , the coordinate bench has decided as under:

“6. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessee has shown income from capital gain amounting to ₹1,03,28,496/- as profit and loss account which was apparently before claiming the indexation benefit. We further note that the assessee while filing the return income assessee has duly taken the said amount of capital gain into account and computed the capital gain accordingly, after taking benefit of indexed cost. However, the ld. AO/ CPC ignored all these facts and picked up these figures without indexation which has resulted in excess amount of income assessed to the tune of ₹27,11,790/-, which in our opinion is wrong and against the facts on record. Even the ld. CIT (A) overlooked the correct facts and figures presented by the assessee. Thus we find merit in the contention of the assessee that the said adjustment made by the AO/ CPC was not a prima facie adjustment to be made u/s 143(1) of the Act as the issue involved/ required a lot of debate/ discussion and facts to be clarified and therefore, cannot be said to be a prima facie adjustment. In our opinion, if the AO/ CPC had any issue with regard to said capital gain the proper course would have been made to fix the scrutiny and to examine the amount of capital gain accordingly. Considering these facts and circumstances, we are inclined to quash the intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act as invalid on the ground that the AO / CPC

8 I.TA. Nos.76 to 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. has no such jurisdiction to make the adjustment of ₹27,11,790/-. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. 9. Considering the facts of the assessee in the light of above decisions , we are inclined to quash the intimation passed by AO CPC u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. Ground no. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed.

ITA No. 77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84 & 85/Kol/2025 for AY 2021-22 .

Order is pronounced in the open court on 2nd June, 2026

Sd/- Sd/-

(Pradip Kumar Choubey /�द�प कुमार चौबे) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश कुमार) Judicial Member/�या�यक सद�य Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य Dated: 2nd June, 2026 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- i) Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. ii) Coronation Commerce Pvt. Ltd. iii) Krypton Agencies Pvt. Ltd. iv) Syncox Traders Pvt. Ltd. v) Panchanan Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. vi) Sati Development Pvt. Ltd. vii) Tasu Estate Pvt. Ltd.

9 I.TA. Nos.76 to 85/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Sweet Home Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. viii) Multitech Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. ix) Trilok Commercial Pvt. Ltd. x) Jiwan Gouri Properties Pvt. Ltd. Alom House, 7B, Pretoria Street, Kolkata-700071 2. Respondent – ACIT, Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)- 27, Kolkata 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)