SANDHYA RANI DAS,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 27, HALDIA, PURBA MEDINIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the issue was interlinked with the case of M/s. M.S. Projects Pvt. Ltd., which had been restored to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the present case was also restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.
What were the facts?
The assessee invested Rs. 11,00,000/- in shares of M/s. M.S. Projects Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer treated this investment as unexplained and made an addition. The CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition.
What were the issues?
Whether the investment made in shares is unexplained. Whether the addition made in the assessee's case should be decided based on the outcome of the company's case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH (SMC
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, AM]
order : January 31, 2018 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT (Appeals) -7, Kolkata dated 16.05.2017 and the only issue arising out of the same relates to the addition of Rs. 11,00,000/- made by the A.O. and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of investment made by the assessee in cash in the shares of M/s. M.S. Projects Pvt. Ltd. by treating the same as unexplained.
The assessee in the present case is an individual who is engaged in the business of trading and contracting. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by her on 31.03.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,48,580/-. As noted by the A.O., share application money of Rs. 20,90,000/- was paid by the assessee to M/s. M.S. Projects Pvt. Ltd. during the year under consideration. The source of the same was explained by the assessee as sale proceeds of Sandhya Rani Das gold ornaments amounting to Rs. 8,98,809/- and two gifts received from her mother and daughter aggregating to Rs. 11,00,000/-. The said source explained by the assessee, however, was not accepted by the A.O. and addition of Rs. 19,98,809/- was made by him to the total income of the assessee in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 28.03.2013.
Against the order passed by the A.O. under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and after considering the submissions made by the assessee as well as the material available on record, the Ld. CIT(A) found no merit in the case of the assessee on this issue and confirmed the addition of Rs. 19,98,809/- made by the A.O. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As submitted by the learned representatives of both the sides, the solitary issue involved in this appeal of the assessee relating to the addition made on account of unexplained investment made in the shares of M/s. M.S. Projects Pvt. Ltd. is interlinked with the issue of addition made under section 68 in the case of M/s. M.S. Projects Pvt. Ltd. on account of unexplained share application money which includes the amount in question added in the case of the assessee. As further submitted by them, the outcome in the case of M/s. M.S. Projects Pvt. Ltd. will have a direct bearing on the issue involved in this appeal of the assessee and since the matter involved in the case of M/s. M.S. Projects Pvt. Ltd. has been restored by the Tribunal to the file of the A.O. vide its order of even date passed in the issue involved in the
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- J.M.Swamy vs. Government Of INDIAKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Acc LTD. vs. Secy.Industries Deptt.Orissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Kumaran Transports (Tuticorin) Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner Madras · 16 Oct 2026