CIT v. Atul Jain

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SIDDHESHWARI VYAPAAR PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2280/Kol/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Years :2012-2013) Dcit, Central Circle-1(2), Vs Siddheshwarivyapaar Pvt Ltd Kolkata 2Nd Floor, 159, Ravindra Sarani Kolkata-700007 Pan No. :Aancs 2337 J (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Cit-Dr निर्धाररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shrisoumitra Choudhury & Rainak Jain, Advocates सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenueagainst The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Dated 06.05.2025For The Assessment Year2012-2013. 2. The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Barred By 69 Days. Considering The Submissions Of The Ld. Cit-Dr & Looking To The Facts Of The Case, We Condone The Delay Of 69 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Revenue & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 3. The Only Issue Raised In This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.6,82,00,000/- Made U/S.68 Of The Act On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credits Received From Shell Entities In The Guise Of Share Capital.

…Renewables (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018) 94 taxmann.com 29 (Bombay) 5 Pr. CIT vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. [2018] 93 taxmann.com 153 (Bombay) M/s Geetatax vs. DCIT (Special Civil Application No. 20977 of 2016-Rajasthan High Court) CIT vs. Atul Jain [2008] 299 ITR 383 (Del) Signature Hotels (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO [2012] 20 taxmann.com 797 (Delhi) NCOME TAX DEPARTMEN Delhi) 5.2 The assessee further argues that mere reliance on third-party statements and unverified reports, without providing an opportunity for cross-examination or independent inquiry, cannot form a valid basis for making the addition. The lack of con…

NAVNIRMAN INFRACON PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 10(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

…sed thereupon is invalid and cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee find support from the decisions of CIT Vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 38 taxmann.com 403 (Delhi), Girishbhai Dahyabhai Patel vs. DCIT (2025) 474 ITR 299, CIT Vs. Atul Jain (2008) 299 ITR 383 (Delhi) and Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadekar (2004) 137 taxman 479 (Bom). We also note that there is no independent application of mind by the Id. AO to the information received and therefore, this is at best a case of borrowed satisfaction by the Id. Assessing Officer. Considering these facts and circumstances and in the light of aforesaid…

NARAYAN SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

…regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and\ntransactions and the persons with whom the transactions had taken\nplace. In this respect, we may rely upon the decision of Hon'ble\njurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Atul Jain [2000]\n299 ITR 383, in which case the information relied upon by the AO for\ninitiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Act did indicate sites of the\ncapital gain and nobody knew which shares were transacted and with\nwhom the transaction has taken place and in that case there were\nabsolutely no details available and the information supplied was\nextremely scanty and…

AVIRAL MARKETING PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2012-13 Aviral Marketing Pvt. Ltd…….……………..............................……….……Appellant 7, Camac Street, Azimganj House, 1St Floor, Shakespeare Sarani, Kol- 700017. [Pan: Aacca3794N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata……………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ruchika Sharma, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 03, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.11.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

…ith regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and transactions and the persons with whom the transactions had taken place. In this respect, we may rely upon the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Atul Jain (2000) 299 ITR 383, in which case the information relied upon by the AO for initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Act did indicate the source of the capital gain and nobody knew which shares were transacted and with whom the transaction has taken place and in that case there were absolutely no details available and the 5 Aviral Marketing Pvt. Ltd information suppli…