“NFAC”

Shree Anjani Sarees Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

assessee for the assessment year 2016-17 is directed against the order dated 24.11.2023 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Appeals, NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the ‘ld. CIT(A)’]. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee-company is engaged in the business of trading ... restricting the addition of Rs. 15,33,538/-. During the intervening time, the ld. AO, NFAC however passed an order u/s 271(1)(c) with regard to the sum of Rs. 30,20,362/- ignoring the fact that relief granted by Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata as in the case

Saurabh Daga, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 46(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [in short ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 26.12.2023 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 154 of the Act dated 15.01.2023. 2. The only ... Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069. 2. ITO, Ward-46(1), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. //// By order

Animesh Paul, Habra vs. ITO, Ward-50(2), Kolkata

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.981/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Animesh Paul……………..…...…………............…...……………....Appellant Bergoom, Habra, North 24 Parganas, W.B – 743263. [Pan: Alspp3880C] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(2), Kolkata….............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Bisweswar Ghosh, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Kr. Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 29, 2024

hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC erred in confirming the addition made by the A.O to the tune of Rs 1,29,33,910/- u/s 69A of the Income

Purnasons Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-8(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [in short ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 30.10.2023 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 154 of the Act dated 16.01.2023. 2. In order ... order forwarded to: 1. Purnasons Pvt. Ltd., 10/D/1, Ho-Chin-Minh Sarani, Kolkata-700 001. 2. ITO, Ward-8(1), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. //// By order

Punit Popat, Kolkata vs. Itb, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1359/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Punit Popat………………..….….…………............…...……………....Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata- 7000069. [Pan: Aflpp3320E] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi……….…….............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 29, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.10.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1 For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Passing The Order Ex Parte Without Affording Reasonable Opportunity Of Hearing. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Denying The Deduction Claimed By The Assessee Of Rs. 4,38,673/- On Account Of Interest Of Housing Loan U/S 24(B) Of The Act.

Punit Popat………………..….….…………............…...……………....Appellant C/o Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata- 7000069. [PAN: AFLPP3320E] vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi……….…….............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent ... सद"य/Accountant Member "या"यक सद"य/Judicial Member Dated: 29.04.2024. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Punit Popat 2. ITO, NFAC, Delhi 3.CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), I.T.A. No.1359/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Punit Popat //// By order

Bihari Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur vs. ITO, Ward-14(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1315/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bihari Distributors Pvt. Ltd…..…………............…...……………....Appellant H. No.240, Ambazari Layout, Nagpur, Maharashtra-440010. [Pan: Aadcb6286B] Vs. Ito, Ward-14(1), Kolkata….............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Datta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 31, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 29, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.10.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. That The Order Passed U/S 250 Is Bad In Law As Well As On Facts Of The Case. 2. That The Hon'Ble Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Law As Well As On Facts Of The Case In Not Providing Reasonable Opportunity Of Hearing To The Appellant. 3. That The Hon'Ble Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Law As Well As On Facts Of The Case By Confirming The Addition Made By Ld. Assessing Officer In Respect Of Share Capital Received During The Year To The Tune Of

Order passed u/s 250 is bad in law as well as on facts of the case. 2. That the Hon'ble CIT(A), NFAC erred in law as well as on facts of the case in not providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant. 3. That ... NFAC erred in law as well as on facts of the case by confirming the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer in respect of share capital received during the year to the tune of I.T.A. No.1315/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bihari Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Rs.14,22,39,000/- by treating

Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-11(1), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.1157/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aaacs1425L) Vs. Acit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata ……. Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Sm. Lata Goyal, Aca Appeared For Appellant Shri S. Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent . Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 29.04.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 05.09.2023 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order U/S. 154 R,W,S, 143(3) Of The Act By Acit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata Dated 12.07.2022. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), [Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Cit(A)] Was Not Justified & Grossly Erred In Not Granting The Interest U/S. 244A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act').

passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in short the “Act”) by Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short Ld. “CIT(A)”] dated 05.09.2023 arising out of the Assessment order ... Appellant – Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road (South), Topsia, Kolkata-700046. 2. Respondent – ACIT, Circle11(1), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. CIT 5. Departmental Representative 6. Guard File.By order

M/S.G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg)(P)Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Both these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)” vide separate orders dated 25.07.2023 which are against the assessment orders by the DCIT Circle ... April, 2024. (Sanjay Garg) Accountant Member Dated:29th April, 2024 JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. 4. The CIT, 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata //// By Order

M/S.G.S. Atwal & Co.(Engg) (P)Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Both these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)” vide separate orders dated 25.07.2023 which are against the assessment orders by the DCIT Circle ... April, 2024. (Sanjay Garg) Accountant Member Dated:29th April, 2024 JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. 4. The CIT, 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata //// By Order

Ranbhumi Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., NFAC, Delhi / I.T.O., Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

The appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.727&728/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ranbhumi Nirman Pvt Ltd.………………............…...……………....Appellant Mercantile Building, 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Block-B, 2Nd Floor, Room No.10, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aafcr6772E] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi…………...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Joydeep Chakrabotry, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 25, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 29, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 15.10.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.727/Kol/2022 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.727/Kol/2022 – The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Ranbhumi Nirman Pvt Ltd.………………............…...……………....Appellant Mercantile Building, 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Block-B, 2nd Floor, Room No.10, Kolkata-1. [PAN: AAFCR6772E] vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi…………...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Joydeep Chakrabotry, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant. None appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing ... foregoing grounds before, or at the time of hearing of appeal. PRAYER: It is prayed that the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi be set aside and full relief may be granted to the appellant.” 3. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited

Ranbhumi Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., NFAC, Delhi / I.T.O., Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

The appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. Nos.727&728/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ranbhumi Nirman Pvt Ltd.………………............…...……………....Appellant Mercantile Building, 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Block-B, 2Nd Floor, Room No.10, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aafcr6772E] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi…………...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Joydeep Chakrabotry, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 25, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 29, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 15.10.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Assessee’S Appeal Ita No.727/Kol/2022 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita No.727/Kol/2022 – The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Ranbhumi Nirman Pvt Ltd.………………............…...……………....Appellant Mercantile Building, 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Block-B, 2nd Floor, Room No.10, Kolkata-1. [PAN: AAFCR6772E] vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi…………...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Joydeep Chakrabotry, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant. None appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing ... foregoing grounds before, or at the time of hearing of appeal. PRAYER: It is prayed that the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi be set aside and full relief may be granted to the appellant.” 3. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited