BEEGEEY REALTORS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL) - 2, , KOLKATA

Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 21.02.2025 of the Principal CIT(Central), Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as the “ld. PCIT”] exercising his revision juri iction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the “Act”]. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income u/s 139 of the Act showing total income of Rs.1,710/-. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the cases of Raj Group & Others and the assessee being one of the persons/concerns related to Giridhari Lal Goenka, was also covered under the search and seizure operation and during the course of search and seizure operation, various incriminating materials/documents were found and seized. The return of income of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and the case Beegeey Realtors Pvt. Ltd

2
was assessed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 31.12.2022 at an assessed loss at Rs.1,710/-. The ld. PCIT by exercising his revision juri iction u/s 263 has found following discrepancies:
(i) issue related to unsecured loan,
(ii) issue related to construction expenses and (iii) issue related to sundry creditors,
2.1
The ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the Act has found that it is a case of erroneous assessment and it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and accordingly, a show-cause notice u/s 263 of the Act was issued and submission was filed by the assessee but the ld. PCIT after going over the submission set aside the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act and directed the Assessing Officer to make necessary verification/enquiry and pass a de novo assessment order.
3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before us. The ld. AR in the course of argument did not press the issue related to sundry creditors and he raised issues related to unsecured loan and construction expenses. Regarding the issue of unsecured loan, the submission of the ld. AR is that in the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished documentary evidences such as source of fund, loan confirmation, copy of bank statement, audited financial statement and ITR acknowledgement and not only that, the Assessing Officer had also issued notices u/s 133(6) of the Act and the same were duly complied. Accordingly, the ld. AR stated that the order passed by the ld.
CIT(A) in the aforesaid two issues are bad in law and are liable to be set aside.
Beegeey Realtors Pvt. Ltd

3
3.1
Regarding the issue of claim of construction expenses, the submission of the ld. AR is that the construction expenses of Rs.73,49,863/- was debited in year under consideration and transferred fully to the WIP which was reflected in the P & L A/c as change in inventory and the assessee has duly submitted the P & L A/c and ledger
A/c. The ld. AR has submitted that the Assessing Officer had made enquiries regarding the said issue before passing the order u/s 143(3) of the Act. Hence, the issue of claim of construction is not prejudice to the interest of the revenue which requires interference by ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the Act.
4. Contrary to that, the ld. DR supports the impugned order.
5. Upon hearing the submissions of ld. counsels of the respective parties, we are going to decide only two issues i.e. unsecured loan taken as the assessee and construction expenses and the assessee did not press the issue regarding sundry creditors and on the issue of sundry creditors, the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is confirmed. Now, looking into the facts of the case on the issue of unsecured loan, we find after going over the facts of the case that the assessee has taken loan of Rs.189.00 lakhs from the following parties:
Name and Address of Party

PAN

Loan
Taken
Amount
(Rs.)
Net Worth of the Lendor(Rs.)
Loan Repaid in AY

Jajodia Finance Ltd
69A,
Lenin
Sarani,
3rd
Floor,
Kolkata
700013
AAACJ8457D

36,00,000

AY2021-22

JNB Sidhu Finance
Pvt Ltd
69A, Lenin Sarani, 3rd
Floor,
Kolkata
700013
AABCJ0370Q
10,00,000

2,697.16
Lakhs

AY 2021-22

Main Land Finance AACCM3533D
20,00,000
9927.83
A.Y 2023-24
Beegeey Realtors Pvt. Ltd

4
Pvt. Ltd.
69A, Lenin Sarani, 3rd
Floor,
Kolkata
700013
Lakhs
Sri Salasar Suppliers
Pvt. Ltd.
69A, Lenin Sarani, 3rd
Floor, Kol-13. AADCS8457R
23,00,000
2422.87
lakhs
A.Y 2021-22
Topdeal Agencies Pvt.
Ltd.
69A, Lenin Sarani, 3rd
Floor, Kol-13. AABCT0268R
100,00,000
2242.73
lakhs
NA

5
not find that the issue of claim of construction is prejudice to the interest of the revenue which and we uphold the order u/s 143(3) of the Act passed by the Assessing Officer on this issue.
7. Keeping in view the above discussion, we find that the order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the Assessing Officer cannot be said to be prejudicial to the interest of the revenue on the aforesaid two counts as the assessee has duly disclosed the entire thing before the Assessing
Officer. Hence, the revision order u/s 263 of the Act passed by the ld.
PCIT is set aside.
8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Kolkata, the 11th September, 2025. [Rajesh Kumar]

[Pradip Kumar Choubey]
Accountant Member

Judicial Member

Dated: 11.09.2025. RS

Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Appellant -
2. Respondent -
3. CIT(A)-
4. CIT- ,

////
By order