Kolkata 2 214 ITR 244 CIT v. Carbo Industrial

250 ITR 539High Court2001#1281 most cited

What is Kolkata 2 214 ITR 244 CIT v. Carbo Industrial authority for?

A loss from share transactions, found by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to be genuine based on facts and circumstances, cannot be held erroneous or perverse by higher authorities and is eligible for deduction. The genuineness of transactions cannot be doubted merely due to non-appearance of brokers if payments are made by account payee cheques.

88

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Emerald Commercial Ltd. · 250 ITR 539 · share loss genuineness · deduction of genuine loss · Tribunal findings of fact · not erroneous or perverse · share transactions · Calcutta High Court · evidentiary value · burden of proof · 2001

Judgments citing Kolkata 2 214 ITR 244 CIT v. Carbo Industrial

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. M/S Apeejay Shipping Ltd

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITA/26/2021HC Calcutta08 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…bject to facilitate the assessee to plough back its unaccounted income in the form of fictitious LTCG. The learned Standing Counsel has referred to the 5 214 ITR 244 Calcutta High Court 6 (2001) 250 ITR 539 7 ITA No. 456 of 2007 Bombay High Court ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 26 of 150 findings recorded by the Assessing Officer, CIT(A) and pointed out that the learned Tribunal without even noting the intricate factual details allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. The learned Tribunal has not rendered any finding on the modus…

Shri Harish Kumar Buyani, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T.Circle-34, Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2547/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2010-11

Section 147Section 68

…r. Biyani Vs. ACIT, Cir-34 Kol Page 7 Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the view taken by the Tribunal allowing share loss cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse CIT vs. Emerald Commercial Ltd & Anr (2001) 171 CTR (Cal) 193: (2001) 250 ITR 539 (Can. CIT- vs. Dhawan Investment & Trading Co. Ltd (1999) 238 ITR 486 (Can and CIT vs. Currency Investment Co. Ltd (2000) 158 CTR (Cal) 361: (2000) 241 ITR 494 (Cal) relied on. Respectfully following the same, we hold that the impugned loss claimed by assessee is genuine loss in the above facts and circumstances of the case and therefore eligible…

Shagun Business Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-5(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2395/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…not be a factor for such purpose.' Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the view taken by the Tribunal allowing share loss cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse.- CIT vs. Emerald Commercial Ltd & Anr (2001) 171 CTR (Cal) 193: (2001) 250 ITR 539 (Can. CIT- vs. Dhawan Investment & Trading Co. Ltd (1999) 238 ITR 486 (Can and CIT vs. Currency Investment Co. Ltd (2000) 158 CTR (Cal) 361: (2000) 241 ITR 494 (Cal) relied on. Respectfully following the same, we hold that the impugned loss claimed by assessee is genuine loss in the above facts and circumstances of the case and therefore eligibl…

Birendra Kumar Sharma, Gwalior vs. ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/IND/2017[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Dharmendra Kumar Choudhary, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 710/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Vijay Kumar Shrivastava, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 709/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Ramesh Chandra Parashar, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 708/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Dabra vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 707/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Lalta Prasad Choudhary, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 706/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Santosh Kumar Sharma, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 705/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Kamlesh Kumar Choudhary, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 704/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Khemraj Singh Chauhan, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 703/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Sukhdev Singh Dhariwal, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 702/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Shri Sanjay Kumar Sahu, Gwalior vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 701/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

The ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal vs. Shri Vinod Vaish, Bhopal

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 189/IND/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

…ng Para 5 119- CIT vs. Ram Narain cannot take the place of evidence & 6 121 Goel or proof 15 (2003) 262 ITR 295 It is settled proposition that the Para 3 122- (P & H) CIT vs. presumption however strong 124 Faqir Chaman Lal cannot substitute evidence 16 (2001) 250 ITR 539 The finding of the Income Tax Para 5 125- CIT vs. Emerald Officer and CIT(A) were based on & 6 126 Commercial Ltd. & presumption and not warranted Anr. by the facts of the case 17 332 ITR 468 (P&H) As such the Ld. CIT(A) to that Para 2 128 CIT vs. Atam Valves extent is justifies in holding that P. Ltd. estimation of sales on the basis of lose sli…

Prakasho Devi Saria, Siliguri vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(1), Siliguri

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2360/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T. A No. 2360/Kol/2017 A.Y 2014-15 Prakasho Devi Saria Vs. Cit(A), Siliguri Pan: Agzpd611L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Lakhotia, ld.AR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…n given on this issue, are listed below.- Sl.No. ITA Nos. Name of the Assessee Date of order/judgment 1. ITA No. 714 to DCIT vs. Sunita Khemka 28.10.2015 718/Kol/2011 ITAT, Kolkata 2. 214 ITR 244 CIT vs. Carbo Industrial Holdings - Calcutta High Court Ltd 3. 250 ITR 539 CIT vs. Emerald Commercial ltd 23.03.2001 4. ITA No. 1236- Manish Kumar Baid vs. ACIT 18.08.2017 1237/Kol/2017 5. Gautam Pincha 15.11.2017 6. Kiran Kothari HUF 15.11.2017 7. ITA No. 2281/Kol/2017 Navneet Agarwal vs. ITO 20.07.2008 8. ITA No. 456 of 2007 CIT vs.Shri Mukesh Ratilal Marolia 07.09.2011 Bombay High Court. 9. ITA No. 95 of 2017 ( O PCI…

Mangilal Jain, Darjeeling vs. ITO, Ward - 3(3), Darjeeling

Appeal is allowed

ITA 729/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2014-15 Mangilal Jain Income Tax Officer, बनाम / C/O Advocate Pradip Ward-3(3), Nr. Lal V/S. Lakhotia, 2Nd Floor, Metro Kothi, Darjeeling Plaza, Sf Road, Siliguri-734005 [Pan No.Afkpj 4178 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Dhiraj Lakhotia, A.R अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 05-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Siliguri’S Order Dated 22.03.2018 Passed In Case No.69/Cit(A)/Slg/2016-17, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities Findings Treating His Short Term Capital Loss (Stcl) Arising From Sale Of Shares After Payment Of Security Transaction Tax (Stt), Amounting To ₹1,92,320/- As Bogus Unexplained Cash Credits. The Cit(A)’S Detailed Discussion To This Effect Reads As Under:- “4. Decision :- I Have Perused The Assessment Order, The Grounds Of Appeal & The Submissions Made By The Ld.. A/R On Behalf Of The Appellant. My Observations & Findings Are As Under :- 4.1. The Present Appeal Emanates After Disallowing Rs. 11,92,320/- Arising Out Of Shares Transaction & Treated The Same As Bogus. In This Case The Assessee Purchased 32000 Shares Of Global Infratech & Finance Ltd. Through Eureka Stock & Shares Broking Services Limited @ Rs. 77.37 Per Share Aggregating To Rs. 24,79,714/- On 11.02.2014 & Further Sold The

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69

…en given on this issue, are listed below:- Sl.No ITA Nos. Name of the Assessee Date of order /Judgment 1. ITA No.714 to DICT vs. Sunita Khemka 28.10.2015 718/Kol/2011 ITAT, Kolkata 2 214 ITR 244 CIT vs. Carbo Industrial Holdings Ltd. - Calcutta High Court 3. 250 ITR 539 CIT vs. Emerald Commercial Ltd. 23.03.2001 4. ITA No.1236- Manish Kumar Baid vs. ACIT 18.08.2017 1237/KOl/2017 5. Gautam Pincha 15.11.2017 6 Kiran Kothari HUF 15.11.2017 7 Navneet Agarwal vs. ITO 20.07.2018 CIT vs. Shri Mukesh Ratilal Marolia 07.09.2011 Bombay High Court 9 ITA No.95 of 2017 (O&M) PCIT vs. Prem Pal Gandhi 18.01.2018 10 Sanjay Meht…

Vivek Bhaia, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(4), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2295/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm ] I.T. A No. 2295/Kol/2018 A.Y 2009-10 M/S. Vivek Bhaia V/S. I.T.O. Ward 36(4), Kolkata Pan: Aedpb3153Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT, ld.DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 40

…ot be a factor for such purpose. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the view taken by the Tribunal allowing share loss cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse.--CIT vs. Emerald Commercial Ltd. & Anr. (2001) 171 CTR (Cal) 193 : (2001) 250 ITR 539 (Cal), CIT vs. Dhawan Investment & Trading Co. Ltd. (1999) 238 ITR 486 (Cal) and CIT vs. Currency Investment Co. Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Cal) 361 : (2000) 241 ITR 494 (Cal) relied on." Respectfully following the same, we hold that the impugned loss claimed by assessee is genuine loss in the above facts and circumstances of the case and therefore eli…

Sri Ashok Kumar Sharda, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 34(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2366/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2366/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sri Ashok Kumar Sharda..……………………………………....………………..…………………….….Appellant 22(A), 3Rd Floor 16, India Exchange Place Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Amops 3276 Q] Income Tax Officer, Ward-34(2), Kolkata…............................................................…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68

…not be a factor for such purpose.' Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the view taken by the Tribunal allowing share loss cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse.- CIT vs. Emerald Commercial Ltd & Anr (2001) 171 CTR (Cal) 193: (2001) 250 ITR 539 (Cal), CIT vs. Dhawan Investment & Trading Co. Ltd (1999) 238 ITR 486 (Cal) and CIT vs. Currency Investment Co. Ltd (2000) 158 CTR (Cal) 361: (2000) 241 ITR 494 (Cal) relied on. Respectfully following the same, we hold that the impugned loss claimed by assessee is genuine loss in the above facts and circumstances of the case and therefore eligibl…

Santi Ranjan Das, North 24 Parganas vs. DCIT, Circle - 51, Kolkata

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 824/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 824/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Santi Ranjan Das –Vs- Dcit, Circle-51, Kolkata [Pan: Adfpd 9023 L] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…n given on this issue, are listed below:- Sl.No ITA Nos. Name of the Assessee Date of order /Judgment 1. ITA No.714 to DICT vs. Sunita Khemka 28.10.2015 718/Kol/2011 ITAT, Kolkata 2 214 ITR 244 CIT vs. Carbo Industrial Holdings Ltd. - Calcutta High Court 3. 250 ITR 539 CIT vs. Emerald Commercial Ltd. 23.03.2001 4. ITA No.1236- Manish Kumar Baid vs. ACIT 18.08.2017 1237/KOl/2017 5. Gautam Pincha 15.11.2017 6 Kiran Kothari HUF 15.11.2017 7 Navneet Agarwal vs. ITO 20.07.2018 CIT vs. Shri Mukesh Ratilal Marolia 07.09.2011 Bombay High Court PCIT vs. Prem Pal Gandhi 18.01.2018 (O&M) 10 Sanjay Mehta 28.09.2018 3 Sant…