How many judgments cite Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

130 judgments on BharatTax cite Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (353 ITR 171), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 131, Section 133(6), Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 143(2).

Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

353 ITR 171High Court2013#789 most cited

What is Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

When an assessee furnishes sufficient evidence proving the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of loan or share application transactions under Section 68, the Assessing Officer cannot make an addition solely because summons issued to the creditors or subscribers were unserved or went uncomplied with. The inability of the tax authorities to secure the attendance or response of third parties does not automatically negate the evidence provided by the assessee.

130

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 353 ITR 171 · Section 68 · Section 131 · Section 133(6) · cash credit addition · share application money · identity creditworthiness genuineness · third party non-compliance · summons unserved · assessee's burden of proof

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 131 Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147 Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 106 creditworthiness of the creditor share capital and share premium bogus share capital source of source principal officer share application money mere change of opinion section 131 genuineness of the transaction section 133(6)addition u/s 68

Judgments citing Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMBICA DHATU PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2389/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 250

…ssessee has duly discharged its onus. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decisions of (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC),(ii CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom);(iii)Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol);(iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. Consequently, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal of the revenue by upholding the order of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 7. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 05.0…

KAMESHWAR ALLOYS AND STEELS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 49/RAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi14 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.49/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kameshwar Alloys & Steels Pvt. Ltd….…............................……….……Appellant 128/3, Hazra Road, Bhawanipur, Kol-700026.. [Pan: Aadck6558K] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Md. Shadab Ahmed, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 14, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 05.02.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company, Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration. The Case Was Originally Selected For Scrutiny On The Issue Of Share Capital & Share Premium Received During The Year. The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment Ex Parte Under Section 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, On The Ground Of Alleged Non-Compliance & Made An Addition Of ₹2,00,00,000 Being Share Capital & Share Premium Received From Various Companies, Treating The Same As Unexplained Under Section 68 Of The Act. Subsequently, A Search & Seizure Operation Under

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…ld be arrived at, no question of law as such arose. The High Court was right in refusing to state a case.” 7.1 The case of the assessee is also squarely covered by the decisions of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (353 ITR 171 (Cal) wherein it has held that where all the evidences were filed by the assessee proving the identity and creditworthiness of the loan transactions , the fact that summon issued were returned unserved or no body complied with them is of little significance to prove the genuineness of the transactions and identity and creditworthiness of the cred…

GOLDMOON EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(2),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2086/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…mplied in two cases. In defense of his arguments the ld AR relied on the following decisions: CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 l (SC); (i) (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. 7. We have perused the above decisions and find it has been held in all the decisions that addition u/s 68 cannot be made u/s 68 for the sole reason of non compliance to summons u/s 131 of the Act or…

ABHIRUCHI MARKETING P. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 934/KOL/2025[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2025AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Abhiruchi Marketing P. Ltd. C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Ito, Ward 7(1) Advocates, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 2, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Floor, Suite Chowringhee Square, Fifth Floor, Vs. No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal-700001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca1408B Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR

Section 131Section 132(6)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 263Section 68

…ld be arrived at, no question of law as such arose. The High Court was right in refusing to state a case.” 2.8. The case of the assessee is also squarely covered by the decisions of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol) wherein it has held that where all the evidences were filed by the assessee proving the identity and creditworthiness of the loan transactions , the fact that summon issued were returned un-served or no body complied with them is of little significance to prove the genuineness of the transactions and identity and creditworthiness of the cre…

M/S BLUPEX NIRYAT PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2346/KOL/2025[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: the AO name, address, PAN, balance sheet, bank statement etc. to prove the genuineness of share application money received. The ADIT (Inv.), Unit 3(4) issued summons under Section 131 of the Act to the allottee company which was not responded. We note that the assessee has issued 10,000 equity shares at the face value of Rs.10/- and premium of Rs.90/-. Consequently, the AO added the amount under Section 68 of the Act which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A).

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…annot be a ground for making the addition in the hands of the assessee as has been held in the case of CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC), (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom), (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol), (iv)ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. Consequently, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition. 5. In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 23.12.2025 (Rajesh Kumar) Accountant Me…

M/S. AKSHARA ABASAN PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1638/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2012-2013

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…on'ble Calcutta High\nCourt. ITAT/138/2025 [dt. 28.10.2025]\n(ii) Pr. CIT vs. Goodview Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court.\nITAT/114/2025\n(iii) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC);\n(iv) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol);\n6. The Ld. D.R opposed the arguments as put forth by the Ld. A.R by\nsubmitting that the share application money was received by the\nassessee from the aforesaid two subscribers who were not having any\ncreditworthiness and also did not reply to the notices u/s 133(6) and\nu/s 131 of the Act . The ld DR submitted that the three ingredient…

ANIRUDH KHEMKA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 30(7), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 185/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita No.185/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Year: 2017-18)\Nanirudh Khemka\Nito, Ward 30(7)\N117, Block-F, New Alipore,\Naayakar Bhawan (Dakshin), 2,\Nalipore, Kolkata-700053\Ngariahat Road, Kolkata-700068,\Nwest Bengal\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Afopk6596A\Nassessee By\Nrevenue By\Ndate Of Hearing:\Ndate Of Pronouncement:\Ns/Shri Giridhar Dhelia,\Nrajeeva Kumar, Ars\Nshri Manas Mondal, Dr\N15.10.2025\N19.11.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\Nthis Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)"] Dated 27.11.2024 For The Ay 2017-18.\Nthe Only Issue Raised By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Id. Cit (A) Confirming The Addition Of ₹1,59,90,557/- As Made By The Id. Ao U/S 68 Of The Act In Respect Of Unsecured Loans Taken By The Assessee As Well As Interest Paid Thereon.\N2.

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…ore the authorities below. The case of the assessee find support from the following decisions:-\n(i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC);\n(ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom);\n(iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol);\n(iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and\n(v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020.\n2. 6. In the case of Orissa Corporation Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:\n\"That in this case the respondent had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It wa…

ADHIRA VINICOM PRIVATE LIMITED,HOWRAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (10)1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 998/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Adhira Vincom Private Limited Ito, Ward (10)1, Kolkata 52/1, 2Nd Floor, Santan Mistry Chowringhee Square, Lane, Near Oriya Para Mandir, Vs. Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Howrah-711011, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahca4935E Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, DR

Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…plied. In defense of his argument he relied on the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); Assessment Year; 2012-13 (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. 07. The Ld. D.R strongly controverted and opposed the arguments as put forth by the Ld. A.R by submitting that the share application money was received by the assessee from various subscribers who were…

CARAVAN CORPORATE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1817/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Caravan Corporate Management Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-6(1), C/O Subash Agarwal & Kolkata Associates, Advocates Sidha Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, P-7, Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite Vs. Chowringhee Square, 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc2572L Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, DR

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

…rgument he relied on the following decisions: Caravan Corporate Management Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2012-13 (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. 06. The Ld. D.R strongly controverted and opposed the arguments as put forth by the Ld. A.R by submitting that the share application money was received by the assessee from various subscribers who were…

SAMRAT FINVESTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENT. CIR. 4(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1038/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrigeorge Mathan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…the Tribunal no adverse inference can be drawn. The ld. AR relied on the following decisions: - “(i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020.” 010. The ld. AR also referred to the chart showing the full details as to investor demonstrating the amounts invested by them, statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act and assessments, framed u/s 143(3)/…

SAMRAT FINVESTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENT. CIR. 4(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1037/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrigeorge Mathan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

SAMRAT FINVESTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENT. CIR. 4(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1036/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrigeorge Mathan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

SAMRAT FINVESTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 5(2) (NOW DCIT, CENT.CIR. 4(2)), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1035/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrigeorge Mathan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE 2(3), KOLKATA vs. LUMINO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MERLIN ACROPOLIS, E.K.T.

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1223/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1223/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Kolkata........................…...........................……….……Appellant Vs. Lumino Industries Ltd……………………............…..….…..….......……...…..…..Respondent Unit No.12/4, Merlin Acropolis, E.K.T., Kol-700107. [Pan: Aaacd9817H] C.O No.57/Kol/2025 (In I.T.A. No.1223/Kol/2025) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Lumino Industries Ltd.......................................................................……….…Cross-Objector Unit No.12/4, Merlin Acropolis, E.K.T., Kol-700107. [Pan: Aaacd9817H] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Kolkata ……………….…..….......……..…...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. N. Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 16, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue & Cross Objections D By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) – 26, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 27.03.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Ay 2014-15. 02. At The Outset, We Note That There Is A Delay In Filing Of The Appeal By 7 Days By The Revenue, For Which, Condonation Petition Has Been Filed. After Hearing Both The Parties & Perusing The Contents Of The Condonation Application Filed By The Revenue, We Are Of The View That The

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice President and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1223/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Kolkata........................…...........................……….……Appellant vs. Lumino Industries Ltd……………………............…..….…..….......……...…..…..Respondent Unit No.12/4, Merlin Acropolis, E.K.T., Kol-700107. [PAN: AAACD9817H] C.O No.57/Kol/2025 (in I.T.A. No.1223/Kol/2025) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Lumino Industries Ltd......................................…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. MINTO PARK ESTATES PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order passed by the learned

ITAT/4/2025HC Calcutta01 Aug 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 68

…ufficient own funds available with them to make the investment. Further the learned tribunal faulted the order passed by the appellate authority by observing 12 [2017] 84 Taxmann.com 58 (Bom) 13 353 ITR 171 (Cal) ITAT NO. 4 OF 2025 REPORTABLE Page 12 of 22 that the appellate authority has not discussed anything about the material facts of the case nor pointed out any defect or discrepancy in the evidence and details furnished by the assessee but merely referred to certain case laws without discussing the case of the assessee. With th…

DELTA DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(3), KOLKATA

ITA 650/KOL/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.650/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Delta Dealers Pvt. Ltd…………………………………………...….……….Appellant Baltikuri, Kalitala, P.O. Dasnagar, Howrah-711113. [Pan: Aaccd9633P] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(3), Kolkata.………….......................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, C.A & Taraknath Jaiswal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 30, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2023 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Under The Name Of Orange Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Being Its Pan No.Aabco0792P. The Return Of The Assessee Initially Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act & The Assessee Complied To The Notices & Assessment Order Was Framed By Determining Total Income Of Rs.45,500/-. Immediately, Thereafter The Said Assessment Order Was Set Aside By The Ld. Pcit, Kolkata-2 By Exercising His Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act. In Consequence To That, Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Was Issued To The Assessee Directing The Assessee To Submit Detailed Information Regarding The Shareholders Along With Supported Evidences In Respect Of Share Capital & Share

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 263Section 68

…f the directors of the subscriber company cannot be a ground of making addition u/s 68 of the Act. In this connection, the ld. AR further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 353 ITR 171, wherein, Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court held that when the assessee files all necessary evidences and records before the Assessing Officer, then mere failure of the creditors to appear cannot be form basis to invoke section 68 of the Act. He further submitted that once the assessee has 5 I.T.A. No.650/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Delta…

NATURE COMMERCIAL PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 853/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2025AY 2008-09

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

…. We also find that the\ncase of the assessee finds support from the following decisions namely : (i) CIT Vs.\nOrissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries\nLtd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom);(iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171\n(Kol);(iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.\n282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020.\nPage 17\nITA No. 853/Kol/2024\nNature Commercial Pvt. Ltd., AY 2008-09\n29. Considering the facts and circumstances and in the light of the decisions as\ndiscussed above, we are inclined to allow th…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. RITESH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1705/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 68

…rified by the assessing officer pursuant to the enquiry conducted in response to the notices issued under Section 133(6) of the Act. The learned Tribunal also referred to the decision of this Court in the case of Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 353 ITR 171 (CAL). Thus we find that there is no question of law much less substantial question of law arising for consideration in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed." 7 I.T.A. No. 1705/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ritesh Properties Pvt. Ltd. The Hon. Jurisdictional High Court in PCIT v. Sreeleathers [2022] 143 taxmann.com 435…

UNIQUE FINANCE & SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 110/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Unique Finance & Securities Acit, Circle 7(1) Private Limited Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Plot-35, 11/1A/1, East Topsia Chowringhee Square, Kolkata, Vs. Road, Gobinda Khatick Road, West Bengal, 700069 Kolkata, West Bengal, 700046 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcr2528L Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Fca Revenue By : Shri Akhil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.05.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Akhil Kumar, SR. DR

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…as been held in the following decisions: Unique Finance & Securities Private Limited; A.Y. 2013-14 (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. 09. Since, the facts of the case of the assessee in the present year are quite similar to the facts in A.Y. 2017-18 beside the case of the assessee being squarely covered by the above decisions, theref…

ANDROMEDA COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 7(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2511/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Andromeda Communications I.T.O., Ward - 7(1), Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, 6/7A, A.J.C. Bose Road,Kolkata, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata, Vs. West Bengal, 700017 West Bengal, 700069 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacca1519K Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashutosh Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.05.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashutosh Kumar, DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 68

…elete the addition. In defense of his arguments, the ld. AR relied on the following decisions:- (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. 06. The ld. DR while referring to page no.49,50 and 61 of the Paper books, pointed out that the money was received by the subscribers in their bank account on a day before make the investment in the a…

Showing 1–20 of 130 · Page 1 of 7