PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. RUNGTA MINES LTD

In the result, these appeals are dismissed and the substantial

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

19 of 22 deduction under section 80-IA of the Act, whereas as per explanation to section 80- IA(8) of the Act, "market value" in relation to any goods or services, means (a) the price that such goods or services would ordinarily fetch in the open market; or (b) the arm's length price as defined in clause

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ITC LIMITED

Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI,HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

price paid or promised. Under Section 108 of the said Act, the lessee is entitled to be put in possession of the property. A lease is therefore a transfer of an interest in land. The interest transferred is called the leasehold interest. The lessor parts with his right to enjoy the property during the term of the lease

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 :

19,55,22,380/- and book profit under Section 115JB at Rs. 59,03,41,20,702/-. The case was selected 5 for scrutiny and notices under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 30.08.2011. Subsequently, notice under Section 142(1) was issued along with a questionnare. 5. The assessee company is engaged in the business

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S DHUNSERI VENTURES LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 20Th August, 2025. Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhorea, Adv. …For Appellant.

Price has to be determined bearing in mind the reason behind establishment of the CPPs namely to ensure uninterrupted power and to save on cost of electricity which otherwise has to be paid to the State Electricity Board. 15. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Electricity Act, 2003. Section

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX -4, KOLKATA vs. M/S LINDE INDIA LIMITED

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

transfer of title to the goods outside India and hence there is no income chargeable to tax in India and therefore the provisions of Section 195 of the Act are not attracted. It was also contended that such advances to suppliers have also not been charged to Profit and loss Account for the relevant assessment year. 4. The Assessing Officer

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. PREMIER TIE UP PVT LTD

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

price of the shares sold and transferred by the Bagri Group of respondents to BulakidasBhaiya and his nominees within a period of 7 days' from date of the handing over of the share scrips and properly executed transfer deeds by the sellers to the purchasers in terms of this final Award. h) All other claims by parties against each other

BALGOPAL MERCHANTS PVT LTD. vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

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

transfer of rights held by under an agreement for sale can be regarded as a part of the consideration for allotment of shares or reason for higher valuation of shares subsequently allotted? 2. We have heard Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Sretapa Sinha and Mr. Samit Rudra, learned advocates appearing for the appellant

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S BST INFRATECH LTD

In the result the appeal is allowed, the order passed by the learned

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

transfers. Further each of these companies invests in each other at very high premium even though there is no business being conducted. Further it is observed that there is no reason or logic provided by any of the companies as to on what basis and calculation they arrived at a value of premium on shares. Neither the assessee

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA vs. KRISHNA KUMAR PARSURAMKA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5,KOLKATA vs. SWATI BAJAJ

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that

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

price came to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the payment was made through account payee cheque. ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 19 of 150 The assessee to show that she is a regular trader and investor in equity share for several years, produced the details of the investment made by her. Further, it was stated that