“addition u/s 68”

Satyam Sureka, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Cir-3(3), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the different assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] I.T.(S.S).A. No. 13 /Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 Satyam Sureka Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata

other issues are concerned, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the grounds of assessee on speculation loss and addition u/s 68 of the Act by treating that the transaction was bogus, so we take up both the issues together. In the present case, during ... exchange. As a result of, the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on speculation loss as well as addition u/s 68 of the Act cannot be said to be legal. Accordingly, the same is hereby directed to be deleted. 9. The next point with regard

Indarsen Shamlal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Circle 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

making addition of aggregate amount of Rs. 1,45,59,616/ to the total income of the assessee com- pany as addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as fictitious loss by way of trading of illiquid derivative/ equity trading without considering the submis- sions made

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (in-Situ), Kolkata vs. Alosha Marketing Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathanjcit(In-Situ), Circle-4(1), Vs M/S Alosha Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata 62A, Hazra Road, Kolkata Pan No. :Aacca 1930 G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Priyanka Salarpuria, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 29.01.2024 Passed For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Ms. Priyanka Salalpuria, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Delayed By 117 Days. In This Regard The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Thus, The Delay Of 117 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Revenue Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 4. The Revenue In Its Appeal Has Raised The Following Grounds :- 1. The Delay In Filing Appeal Before The Hon'Ble Itat Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Is Occurred Due To Large Number Of Time Barring Cases U/S 148A Of The I.T.Act 1961 & System Problem Which May Kindly Be Condoned. 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A). Nfac Has Erred In Deleting The Addition

bogus LTCG u/s 10(38) or setting of business income against bogus STCL as highlighted in the Investigation report. As far as the addition u/s 68 is concerned, the AO did not dispute the fact that 20000 shares of M/s Scan Steels of value Rs 25,61,000 was already

Delta Dealers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(3), Kolkata

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.650/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Delta Dealers Pvt. Ltd…………………………………………...….……….Appellant Baltikuri, Kalitala, P.O. Dasnagar, Howrah-711113. [Pan: Aaccd9633P] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(3), Kolkata.………….......................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, C.A & Taraknath Jaiswal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 30, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2023 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Under The Name Of Orange Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Being Its Pan No.Aabco0792P. The Return Of The Assessee Initially Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act & The Assessee Complied To The Notices & Assessment Order Was Framed By Determining Total Income Of Rs.45,500/-. Immediately, Thereafter The Said Assessment Order Was Set Aside By The Ld. Pcit, Kolkata-2 By Exercising His Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act. In Consequence To That, Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Was Issued To The Assessee Directing The Assessee To Submit Detailed Information Regarding The Shareholders Along With Supported Evidences In Respect Of Share Capital & Share

without dealing materials based on the record and non-appearance of the directors of the subscriber company cannot be a ground of making addition u/s 68 of the Act. In this connection, the ld. AR further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case ... that where Tribunal had gone through the entire evidences and notice stood complied u/s 133(6) by the subscribers the order of deleting addition u/s 68 was upheld. Therefore, the instant issue may be allowed in favour of the assessee by deleting the addition. 6. We, after hearing the rival

Satish Kumar Birdika, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 49(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

along with relevant documents but the AO assessed the total income of the assessee as Rs. 2,32,12,633/- by making an addition u/s 68 of the Act to the tune of Rs. 2,26,30,613/-. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before