Principal CIT v. Sreeleathers

M/S. Delighted Holdings (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dcir, Cir-8(2), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

…d thus, the addition was made and confirmed sans any substantive basis. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed that the addition as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is wrong and may kindly be deleted. The ld. AR relied on the following decisions: (i) PCIT Vs. Sree Leathers 448 ITR 332; (ii) PCIT Vs. Overtop Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 148 taxmann.com 94; (iii) Poddar Realtors Vs. ITO (ITA No. 265/Kol/2023) and (iv) PCIT Vs. Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd. 145 taxmann.com 27 M/s. Delighted Holdings Pvt. Ltd., AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14 12. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the money re…

M/S. Delighted Holdings (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dcir, Cir-8(2), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

…d thus, the addition was made and confirmed sans any substantive basis. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed that the addition as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is wrong and may kindly be deleted. The ld. AR relied on the following decisions: (i) PCIT Vs. Sree Leathers 448 ITR 332; (ii) PCIT Vs. Overtop Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 148 taxmann.com 94; (iii) Poddar Realtors Vs. ITO (ITA No. 265/Kol/2023) and (iv) PCIT Vs. Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd. 145 taxmann.com 27 M/s. Delighted Holdings Pvt. Ltd., AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14 12. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the money re…

ITO, Ward-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Maninya Comfin Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 79/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), M/S. Maninya Comfin Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Vs 9, Lal Bazar Street Lal Bazar Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcm5088N] अपीलाथ"/ (Assessee ) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vinod Kr. Jain, A/R Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/07/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/08/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 26/09/2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Made U/S. 68 Of Rs. 7,96,16,343/- On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit In The Form Of Share Capital With Premium. 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Kol., Is Erred In Deleting The Addition Without Considering The Facts That The Source Of Fresh Share Capital Amount Was Not Properly Explained By The Assessee During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings & The Director Of The Assessee Company Did Not Appear Against Summon U/S. 131 To Substantiate The Claim Of The Assessee With Documentary Evidences. 3. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A), Failed To Appreciate That When The Sums Are Credited In The Books Of Accounts

…we accordingly upheld the order of the CIT(A). The appeal of the revenue is, therefore, dismissed.” 15. Our views are further fortified by the judgment of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Principal CIT vs. Sreeleathers reported in [2022] 448 ITR 332 (Cal) has held as follows: “Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, of 1961, deals with cash credits. It states that where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not in the opinion of the Asses…

DCIT, CC-2(4), Kolkata. vs. Narsingh Ispat Limited., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

…unds raised by the assessee. 21. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.” 13. Our view is further supported by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Principal CIT vs. Sreeleathers reported in [2022] 448 ITR 332 (Cal) wherein Hon’ble Court held as follows: “Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, of 1961, deals with cash credits. It states that where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not in the op…

Poddar Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Burdwan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 265/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Poddar Realtors Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), 1, Parkus Road, Burdwan Vs Burdwan Pin- 713101 [Pan : Aagcp2937G] अपीलाथ"/ (Assessee ) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Fca Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/06/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 07/02/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Which Is Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Dt. 27/09/2021. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Addition Of Rs.25,00,000/- Made U/S 68 Was Factually As Well As Legally Unsustainable & Therefore The Same Deserves To Be Deleted. 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Authorities Below Were Unjustified-In Not Appreciating That The Assessee Had Duly Discharged Its Onus Of Establishing The Identity, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Loan Creditor & In That View Of The Matter The Addition Of Rs. 25,00,000/- Made By Way Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 Was Untenable On Facts & In Law.

…itted that when identities of the lenders stood proved and that the loans were also repaid subsequently, no addition was permissible u/s 68 of the Act. He also relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the cases of Pr.CIT Vs Sree Leathers (448 ITR 332) and Pr.CIT Vs Overtop Marketing Pvt Ltd 5 I.T.A. No. 265/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Poddar Realtors (145 taxmann.com 27). He thus prayed that the order of the lower authorities be reversed and that the additions be deleted. Per contra, the Ld. DR argued supporting the order of the lower authorities. 6. We have heard both the parties and…

M/S Bhikshu Agency Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO, WD-5(3), Kolkata

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

…motrade Pvt. Ltd., Ghanshyam Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. and Anjaniputra Dealcom Pvt. Ltd.” 9. Further, ld. Counsel for the assessee, apart from heavily relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sreeleathers reported in [2022] 448 ITR 332 (Calcutta) and the decision of this Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. M/s. Kemex Engineering (P) Ltd. in ITA No.75/Kol/2021 order dated 01.02.2023 and the following decisions: “1. Judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner vs M/s Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt Ltd in Special leave Petition No. 12644/2018 pronounced on 23.04.20…

Aroto Trade India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-9(1), Kolkata

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

…ny along with the share premium. Reliance placed on various judgments referred in the written submissions and further, reliance placed on the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. M/s. Sreeleathers reported in [2022] 448 ITR 332 (Cal). 6. On the other hand, ld. D/R vehemently argued supporting the orders of both the lower authorities and stated that the financials of the alleged share subscribers filed before the lower authorities indicate that they are accommodation entry providers and Jama-Kharchi companies and do not have sufficient creditworthiness to make the allege…