M/S. GAYAN TRADERS LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II

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

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 143(3) of the Act by order dated December 31, 2007 accepted the long term capital gains which arose in respect of shares held as investments from the earlier years, he also accepted the short term capital gains to the extent the same related to shares held as investments from the earlier years. However, short term capital gains amounting

M/S. INDI STOCK PRIVATE LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA- II

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

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

capital gains. The CIT(A) had taken note of all the material particulars and details which were placed by the assessee before the assessing officer during the scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act dated December 31, 2007. The CIT(A) pointed out that the assessee had maintained separate accounts for trading in shares and in this account

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA 4 vs. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED

In the result, the appeal (ITAT/233/2018) is dismissed and the

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 30Th November, 2021 Appearance :-

Section 43B of the Act on account of provisions for leave encashment written back. The tribunal had re-appreciated the factual position and examined the consistent practice followed by the assessee in obtaining valuation report for ascertaining the incremental leave encashment liability and after taking note of the entire facts, came to the conclusion that the final statements drawn

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. RUSSEL CREDIT LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ,HON'BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR

gain, set off against brought-forward losses from AY 2012-13, alongside allowing a Rs.96,65,106/- losses on disposal of property, plant and equipment. 3. The Principal CIT invoked Section 263 on February 27, 2023, holding the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests due to the shares' classification as stock-in-trade, excess set-off and disallowable capital

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9, KOLKATA vs. GITESH TIKMANI

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. SURAJ SAHANA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI vs. SRI SATYA NARAYAN SARIA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-15, KOLKATA vs. SMT. BABITA AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-18, KOLKATA vs. SRI VIKASH GOEL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. AAYUSH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL KOLKATA vs. RAKESH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9, KOLKATA vs. PUSPA DEVI TIKMANI

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. POOJA JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12, KOLKATA vs. MUKTA AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,BURDWAN vs. BIJAYA TAH

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PR CIT 9, KOLKATA vs. MANISHA TIKMANI

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MUKESH SARAOGI (HUF)

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI vs. PRAKASHO DEVI SARIA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

capital gains. Further, with regard to the bank documents, the CIT(A) states that they are mere self-certifying recitals and cannot save the assessee. To support of such contention, reliance was ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 23 of 150 placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Mohanakala3 as well