Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 v. BST Infratech Ltd.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. PHPL PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

…- 2024] and Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-II vs. Trinetra Commerce & Trade (P.) Ltd. [2016] 75 taxmann.com 70 (Calcutta)[15-09-2016] and Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 vs. BST Infratech Ltd. [2024] 161 taxmann.com 668 (Calcutta)/[2024] 468 ITR 111 (Calcutta)[23-04-2024]. Our attention was drawn to paras 7 and 8 of the order in the case of N.R. Portfolio (P.) Ltd. (supra) which are reproduced as under: “7. In the present case, the assessee claimed that it received Rs. 35 lakhs from seven share applicants. Its assessment was reopened. The assessee did not attend the reassessment proceedings,…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOMANI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

…24 it was clearly recorded by the Ld. AO that information or details pertaining to M/s Shubh Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. were not filed by the assessee. The Ld. AR concluded his arguments by relying on the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court’s cases: (i) BST Infratech [468 ITR 111 (Cal); and (ii) Balgopal Merchants [468 ITR 136 (Cal]. 3.1 Per contra, the Ld. AR argued with the help of written submission and detailed paper books in both the cases. The Ld. AR supported the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that for both the cases, the Ld. AOs’ actions suffered from a legal fatality as they were based on mere change of o…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOMANI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

…24 it was clearly recorded by the Ld. AO that information or details pertaining to M/s Shubh Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. were not filed by the assessee. The Ld. AR concluded his arguments by relying on the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court’s cases: (i) BST Infratech [468 ITR 111 (Cal); and (ii) Balgopal Merchants [468 ITR 136 (Cal]. 3.1 Per contra, the Ld. AR argued with the help of written submission and detailed paper books in both the cases. The Ld. AR supported the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that for both the cases, the Ld. AOs’ actions suffered from a legal fatality as they were based on mere change of o…

M/S. STUPENDORS TRADERS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1)., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes, having been remanded back to the file of Ld

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Also The Assessee Could Not Succeed & The 2 M/S Stupendors Traders Pvt. Ltd. Following Findings Of Ld. Cit(A) Would Summarize His Stand:

…belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom." 2.2 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the findings of authorities below. He also stated that the issues were well settled against the assessee after the cases of BST Infratech Ltd. reported in 468 ITR 111 (Cal) and Balgopal Merchants reported in 468 ITR 136 (Cal). The Ld. DR drew our attention to the relatively poor financials of share subscribers and even of the assessee company. He concluded his arguments by stating that the high premia charged per share was unjustified and the authorities below were justified in invoking the provisions of secti…

ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROF INCOMETAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2),KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. M/S. ANUBANDH FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

…L/2023 for the Assessment Year: 2008-09, order dated 16.06.2025 in which, relying upon the jurisdictional High Court’s decision in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-2 vs. BST Infratech Ltd. [2024] 161 taxmann.com 668 (Calcutta)/[2024] 468 ITR 111 (Calcutta)[23-04-2024], following findings have been made: “8. Since in this case, the identity, creditworthiness of the creditors/share applicants and the genuineness of the transactions could not be proved, therefore, there was justification for making the additions. The Ld. CIT(A) was, however, was carried away by the fact that the directors d…

BEEKAY STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Beekay Steel Industries Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), C/O Subash Agarwal & Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Associates, Advocates, Siddha 110, Shantipally, Vs. Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite Kolkata-700107, West Bengal 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcb3205A Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.07.2025

…aised from the other companies. The ld. CIT (A), after taking into account the contentions and replies of the assessee and remand report, rejoinder filed thereto, dismissed the appeal by following the decision in the case of PCIT vs. BST Infratech Ltd. (2024) 468 ITR 111 (Cal) (HC) and CIT Vs. N.R. Portfolio (P.) Ltd. (2014) 42 taxmann.com 339 (Delhi). The ld. CIT (A) noted that assessee cold not establish the capacity of the investors to invest money for purchase of shares at high premium. The ld. CIT (A) further held that creditworthiness of these investor companies were questionable and explanation offered by…

ITO, KOLKATA vs. BLACKBERRY VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'बी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री जॉजज माथान, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1234/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2008-09 ITO, Kolkata Blackberry Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADCB3718L Appearances: Department represented by : P.N. Barnwal, CIT, DR. Assessee represented by : None. Date of concluding the hearing : 16-June-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 24-July-2025 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA,…

NAMRATA DEALMARK PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 11(4), KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

…1,95,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. 3.1 Before the Ld. CIT(A) also, the assessee could not succeed since the fact of poor financials and nonappearance of Directors could not be plausibly explained. The Ld. DR relied on the case of BST Infratech Ltd reported in 468 ITR 111 (Calcutta) and the case of Balgopal Merchants reported in 468 ITR 136 (Cal) 4. We have gone through the orders of authorities below and heard the Ld. DR. We have also perused the judgments in the cases of BST Infratech (supra) and Balgopal Merchants (supra). We find that there are substantial similarities on facts between the present case and th…

MOONLINK MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

…face value of each equity share to the extent that such quantum of premia were not commanded by even much better known and publicly held companies. The Ld. Departmental Representative also relied on the following case laws: (i) BST Infratech Ltd. reported in 468 ITR 111 (Cal) (ii) Balgopal Merchants reported in 468 ITR 136 (Cal) He mentioned that there were good factual similarities between the cases of BST Infratech [reported in 468 ITR 111 (Cal)] and the case 5 Moonlink Marketing Private Limited of Balgopal Merchants (P) ltd [reported in 468 ITR 136 (Cal)], vis-à-vis the present matter. 3. We have heard the r…

REMIX SUPPLIERS PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. WORD-2(1) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

…ned. However, we are also conscious of the fact that the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has passed two orders which should guide the Ld. AO in completing the assessment in this case. Thus, the Ld. AO must refer to the case of BST Infratech Ltd. reported in 468 ITR 111 (Cal) and Balgopal Merchants reported in in 468 ITR 136 (Cal). The Ld. AO would need to be guided by these case laws in conducing enquiries and the assessee would be expected to cooperate in such enquiries. With these remarks, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment.\n\n4. In result, a…

M/S. BHIKSHU POLYMERS PVT. LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS M/S. JEEVAN COMMOTRADE PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

…face value of each equity share to the extent that such quantum of premia were not commanded by even much better known and publicly held companies. The Ld. Departmental Representative also relied on the following case laws: (i) BST Infratech Ltd. reported in 468 ITR 111 (Cal) (ii) Balgopal Merchants reported in 468 ITR 136 (Cal) The Ld. Departmental Representative, while relying on these cases said that it has been specifically recorded in the Balgopal Merchant case (supra) that the summons issued to Directors of the assessee company not being responded to, could be viewed adversely against the assessee, among…