Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Aditya Vikram Sureka, HUF, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 34(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1650/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Aditya Vikram Sureka Huf -Vs- Ito, Ward-34(2) , Kolkata [Pan: Aamha 4069 D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…operators. The ld DR argued that the assessee had made investment in shares of the aforesaid companies not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the long term capital gains to this extent. The cases of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) were quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entry operators for the purpose of bogus long term capital gains in issue. There is no dispute that assessee having derived…

M/S. Sanjiv Shroff HUF, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 36(3), Kolkata

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 971/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Sanjiv Shroff Huf -Vs- Ito, Ward-36(3) , Kolkata [Pan: Aafhs 3559 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…s. The ld DR drew our attention to the assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested the money in M/s KAFL not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. The cases of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) were quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entry operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. There is no dispute that assessee having derived the LTCG on transfe…

Maruti Traders & Investors, Kolkata vs. ACIT Circle 31, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 846/Kol/2017 I.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14

…us entry operators. He observed that the assessee had invested in the shares of M/s Tuni Textile Mills Limited, a company, not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the huge gains in issue. The cases of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) were quoted in support to plead that the assessee had acted in collusion with various entry operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. This observation of ld AO was admittedly based on the report of the investigation wing of Kolkata Income Tax Department. The assessee specifically plead…

ITO, WD-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Tritium Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Kolkata.………......……….........…………..………….…................Appellant Vs. M/S. Tritium Commodities………..........….……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….......Respondent 7, Babulal Lane Kolkata – 700 007 [Pan : Aacct 8286 G] Appearances By: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Addl. Cit Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 6Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 28Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 15/10/2015, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Assessee Is A Company & Is In The Business Of Investment In Shares & Securities. For The Assessment Year 2012-13, It Filed Its Return Of Income On 27/09/2017, Disclosing Nil Income. It Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2008-09, On 22/10/2008, Declaring Total Loss Or Rs.14,726/-. The Assessment Order Was Passed U/S 147/143(3) Of The Act, On 24/06/2010. Thereafter The Ld. Cit(A), Passed An Order U/S 263 Of The Act, Setting Aside The Assessment Order Dt. 24/06/2010. The Assessing Officer Passed The Impugned Fresh Order In Pursuance To The Order U/S 263 Of The Act, Dt. 31/03/2014, Making An Addition Of The Share Application Money Of Rs.2.07 Crores U/S 68 Of The Act. Aggrieved The Assessee Carried The Matter In Appeal. The Ld. First Appellate Authority Deleted The Addition For The Reasons Given In His Order.

…e taxpayer had failed to prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the share premium money. He terms the impugned share subscription premium ₹690/- per share having face value of ₹10/- each as highly exorbitant. Case laws Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) is further quoted during the course of hearing that the relevant evidence submitted during the course of assessment has to be considered as per the human probabilities by removing all blinkers. Our attention is thereafter invited to the relevant nuances of such share subscription routing i…

Smt. Nalini Bothra, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 35(3), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2014-15

…einabove. 4. Learned Departmental Representative vehemently contends during the course of hearing that both the lower authorities have rightly added the impugned bogus LTCG u/s 68 of the Act in assessee’s hands. He quotes case laws Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) in support. The Revenue’s case therefore is that impugned addition is liable to be sustained. 5. We are given our thoughtful consideration to rival contention. We first of all find that this tribunal’s co-ordinate bench’s order in Neeraj Gupta vs. ITO in ITA No.863/Kol/2018 rejects Revenue…

Smt. Aruna Bansal, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 43(3), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Pramod Kumar Mundhra, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 44(4), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Priyanka Mundhra, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 44(4), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Sri Satya Narayan Sodhani, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(3), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Riddhi Siddhi Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2012-13

…before them. They were entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality of the recitals made In those documents . 8. It is a well settled principle of law as declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs.CIT (214 ITR 801)(SC) that the true nature of transaction have to be ascertained In the light of surrounding circumstances. It needs to be emphasized that standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt has no applicability In determination of matters under taxing statutes. In the present case, It Is clear that apparent is not the real as evidenced from the Investigati…

Ritu Madhogaria, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 47(4), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Omprakash Madhogaria (HUF), Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 48(1), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Kailash Kumar Madhogaria, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 47(4), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Kailash Kumar Madhogaria, HUF, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 47(3), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Radhika Kapoor, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 29(1), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

M/S. S.N. Sodhani, HUF, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(3), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Sri Aditya Sodhani, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward - 34(2), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Smt. Asha Sodhani, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 34(2), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Vikram Singh Sethia, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(4), Kolkata

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…

Suresh Kumar Agarwal, Siliguri vs. ITO, Ward - 2(2), Siliguri

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

…ators. He takes me to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested her money in M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. The…