UJJAL SINHA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
ITA 1933/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2025AY 2011-2012
Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2011-12 Ujjal Sinha……..…………………..………………….……….……….……Appellant 57/3, Ballygunge Circular Road, Ballygunge S.O, Kolkata 19. [Pan: Aeips4499F] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata……………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 13, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.08.2025 Of The Cit (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2011–12. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Filed His Return Of Income U/S.139(1) Of The Act For The A.Y. 2011-12 On 11/02/2012 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.19,12,432/-. In The Instant Case, A Search & Seizure Operation Was Conducted On 24.01.2012 In The Residential Premises Of The Assessee Wherein No Incriminating Material Was Found. Thereafter. The Assessment Was Completed U/S 153A/143(3) Of The Act On 31/03/2014 Assessing The Total Income At Rs.92,12,430/- Wherein The Following Two Additions To The Total Income Were Made:
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)
…d not against loan taken by mortgaging the house property. He has placed reliance on the various decisions including the decision of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. (SC) [2010] 322 ITR 158, CIT vs. Harshvardhan Chemicals and Mineral Ltd. (Raj) [2003] 259 ITR 212. 5. Contrary to that, the ld. DR supports the impugned order thereby submitting that there is no response by the assessee before the lower authorities. 6. Upon hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties, we have perused the records and find that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was on account of loan given from u…
