PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S SHANKAR CREDIT PRIVATE LIMITED

OD 1

ORDER SHEET ITAT/282/2024 IA NO: GA/2/2024 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, KOLKATA VS M/S SHANKAR CREDIT PRIVATE LIMITED

BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ AND The Hon’ble JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR Date: 9th March, 2026.

Appearance: Mr. Aryak Dutt, Adv. Mr.Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. …for the appellant

Mr. S.M. Surana, Adv. Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Mr. Bhasker Sen Gupta, Adv. Ms. Sruti Datta, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Singhi, Adv. …for the respondent

The Court: Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that as no documents have been produced by the assessee before the Assessing Officer and all the relevant documents have been produced directly before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, and as such the Tribunal considering the documents directly and passing an order in favour of the assessee, without remanding the matter back to the assessing officer is bad in law.

2 Learned counsel further suggested the following substantial questions of law: “(i) Whether the learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law by allowing the appeal of the assessee only on the basis that the assessee has furnished all the evidences proving identity and creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of the transactions but AO has not commented on these evidences filed by the assessee? (ii) Whether the learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law by allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the settled position that onus is on the assessee to prove the identity, creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of the transaction? (iii) Whether the learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law by allowing the last fact-finding authority erred by not remanding the matter back to the file of the AO?” Learned counsel appearing for the assessee refers to the assessment order which clearly says that the assessee has produced all the relevant documents and details as asked for in the questionaire by the Assessing Officer. Paper book which has been produced before the Tribunal was already produced before the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT Appeal. The Tribunal in its order dated 29th May, 2023 after considering all the documents have come to a conclusion that the assessee has furnished all the evidences proving identity and creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness

3 of the transactions but AO has not commented on these evidences filed by the assessee.

Besides all the investors have also furnished complete details/evidences before the AO which proved the identity, creditworthiness of investors and genuineness of the transactions. Heard learned counsels for the parties. Perused the memorandum of appeal and the application for stay. We do not find any substantial questions of law arising from this order of the Tribunal dated 29th May, 2023 and the appeal filed by the Income Tax Department is dismissed.

(RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.)

(UDAY KUMAR, J.)

Sp/