PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. MEGAPODE VYAPAR PVT LTD

The appeal is dismissed, and the stay petition

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

disallowance of trading loss and direct the Ld AO to grant set off of alleged loss against the interest/ other

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-14, KOLKATA vs. PKS HOLDINGS

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the question nos

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

set aside and the order of the Assessing Officer is restored. The second issue is with regard to loss in shares and securities amounting to Rs.37,95,659/-. The Assessing Officer on examining the materials placed noted that the assessee had claimed the said loss as business loss and when the case was discussed with the authorised representative

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. MEGAPODE VYAPAR PVT LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

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

disallowance of trading loss and direct the Ld AO to grant set off of alleged loss against the 5 interest

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S JAJODIA FINANCE LIMITED

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam

setting out all the relevant particulars and the assessee company was informed that the information shows that the assessee company does not have any real business activity and the loss shown from trading in shares is bogus. The assessee was directed to show-cause as to why the share trading loss of Rs.1,97,94,148/- should not be disallowed

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5,KOLKATA vs. SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR HIRAWAT

The appeal is allowed and the

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : August 05, 2022. Appearance :- Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. ….For Appellant.

Loss o Rs.651950/- with a view to set the same off against taxable Long Term Capital gains earned by the assessee thereby giving rise to the vice of perversity in the process of decision making ? ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Learned Income Tax Tribunal erred in canceling the disallowance

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S ZULU MERCHANDISE PVT LTD

The appeal is allowed the order passed by

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

set off by the assessee with the trading loss of the abovementioned scripts. As the loss is stated to have been incurred by the assessee was substantial, the assessing officer took up the issue for detail scrutiny with all available tools such as through internet and in other search engines and also took note of the investigation report

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT & TP) vs. M/S. DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

disallowed in computing the total income or loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and the said order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under clause (c) of sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.

Would be that the agricultural income itself would become liable

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date: November 30, 2021. Appearance : Mr. P. K. Bhowmik, Adv. Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Asim Chaudhury, Adv. …For The Respondent The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Brevity) Is Against The Order Dated 8Th October, 2015 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Kolkata In Ita Nos. 262 & 263/Kol/2013 For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration:

set off 40 per cent of losses against normal business profits could not be allowed. On the basis, the Assessing Officer has formed the opinion that the loss of Rs.10.84 crores attributable to the business activity of the assessee involving the manufacture and sale of tea was liable to be disallowed

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. M/S B L TAK AND SONS HUF

The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the learned Tribunal is set aside and the

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 9Th June, 2025.

Loss of Rs.54,13,374/- claimed and set-off by the assessee from sale of scrips of M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd., M/s. Nikki Global Ltd., M/s. Unno Industries Ltd. etc. was correctly disallowed

AI CHAMPDANY INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX, CENTRAL - II KOLKATA , WEST BENGAL

In the result, we find that the order of the

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

loss from export of trading goods. Based on the said audit objection, the assessing officer issued notice under Section 154 dated 11.12.1997 to rectify the computation under Section 80HHC by adjusting setting off export of trading goods with profit on export of manufactured goods. The assessee filed their objections to the said notice on 17.2.1998. As against the order

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC LTD

Bench: The Learned Tribunal – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Which Have Been Disposed Of By A Common Order, Impugned In This Appeal. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :

disallowance only on the ground that the advance was never credited to the profit and loss account and cannot be claimed as deduction upon write off. The CIT(A) held that the advances given were in the nature of trade advances and were not profitable. The learned Tribunal had agreed with the finding recorded by the CIT(A). Thus

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. MAMTA CHORARIA

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 5Th August, 2025

disallowed the loss of Rs. 39,24,838/- incurred from commodities (MCX) and made addition Rs. 39,78,000/- u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of bogus profits from sale of derivatives/stock options through coordinated, premeditated and synchoronized transactions without going into the merits of the case ? b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

M/S8 BANMILA COMMOTRADE PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOL.

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed

Bench: :

set off of loss and Explanation to Section 73 will apply where the explanation being a legal fiction can be limited to cases where a part of business consists of sale and purchase of shares ? II. Whether the loss arising from the business of dealing in shares not falling under the definition of speculative transaction appearing in Section

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. SUMAN KUMAR

Bench: :

setting aside the consequent order. For the legal proposition that orders of injunction should protect the claim in a money decree, the appellant has relied upon decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rahul S. Shah v. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi 21 reported in (2021) 6 SCC 418 and of a Division Bench of this Court in Harleen Jairath

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. SAJJADBHAI NURUDDIN NANDARBARWAL

Bench: :

setting aside the consequent order. For the legal proposition that orders of injunction should protect the claim in a money decree, the appellant has relied upon decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rahul S. Shah v. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi 21 reported in (2021) 6 SCC 418 and of a Division Bench of this Court in Harleen Jairath

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX, ASANSOL vs. M/S EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and it is dismissed

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

disallowance of depreciation which was charged to profit and loss account and added back by the assessee itself in the return of income with cogent reasons as the assessee failed to produce any details before the Assessing Officer and also before the CITA. Further, it is submitted that the tribunal committed an error in reversing the findings of the CITA

M/S. V2 RETAIL LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA

The appeal is Allowed to

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

loss account. The assessing officer while passing the assessment order dated 8.12.2011 disallowed the aforesaid amount of interest of Rs.9,75,16,996/- on unsecured debentures on the ground that it has not been paid within the stipulated period. Aggrieved with the aforesaid assessment order, the appellant/assessee filed an Appeal No.357/XII/Cir- 10/2011-12 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRA vs. JOY PARTNERSHIP MINING CENTRE

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

disallowance on depreciation and thus the net profit came to 5 Rs.77,41,629/-. The loss carried forward by the assessee from previous year was Rs.2,88,71,747/- and after adjusting the aforesaid net profit, the loss carried forward for the next year was Rs.2,11,30,118/-. In the admitted facts of the case, the respondent assessee