KAMALKUNJ COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 9(4),KOLKATA (PRESENTLY DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 5), DELHI, KOLKATA

ITA 1979/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 September 2026AY 2014-201517 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the difference in property investment was reconciled by considering stamp duty, registration charges, and a discount allowed by the builder, thus deleting the sustained addition. It also held that Section 14A disallowance is not applicable when there is no exempt income, deleting the disallowance.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared a low income, but the assessment was completed with significant additions for unexplained investment in property and equities, and disallowance under Section 14A. The CIT(A) partly deleted the additions but sustained a portion of the property investment addition and the Section 14A disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether the difference in property sale consideration is an unexplained investment, and whether disallowance under Section 14A is permissible without exempt income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →