ACIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

bogus purchases. 10 The Ld. AO alleged that the assessee In this regard, the assessee would like to submit that being a company with a turnover it having a professional system of hiring labour exceeding Rs.5,500 Crore, would have a contractors and suppliers of material for quality completely professional system of construction does not cease to exist if such

ACIT, CIRCLE-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

bogus purchases. 10 The Ld. AO alleged that the assessee In this regard, the assessee would like to submit that being a company with a turnover it having a professional system of hiring labour exceeding Rs.5,500 Crore, would have a contractors and suppliers of material for quality completely professional system of construction does not cease to exist if such

M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

bogus purchases. 10 The Ld. AO alleged that the assessee In this regard, the assessee would like to submit that being a company with a turnover it having a professional system of hiring labour exceeding Rs.5,500 Crore, would have a contractors and suppliers of material for quality completely professional system of construction does not cease to exist if such

M/S. SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result Ground no. 1 & 3 of the revenue are allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd…….............................................................……………………..Appellant 27, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 0765 R] Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-12 Kolkata……...............................…….…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13

bogus purchases. 10 The Ld. AO alleged that the assessee In this regard, the assessee would like to submit that being a company with a turnover it having a professional system of hiring labour exceeding Rs.5,500 Crore, would have a contractors and suppliers of material for quality completely professional system of construction does not cease to exist if such

DCIT, CC-2(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BALAJI AGRO PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Central Circle-2(4), M/S Balaji Agro Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, A5-6 Sarkarpool Maheshtala, 4Th Floor, 110 Shantipally, E.M. New Budge Budge Trunk Rd. Vs. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 Gopalpur 24 Paraganas South West Bengal Kolkata-700143, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcb9078M Assessee By : Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.07.2025

TDS at source though the said party was not found on the address given by the party. Whereas in respect of the other two lenders, the AO has not made any addition as replies were received in response to notice u/s 133(6) of the Act. We note that the loan was also repaid at later date. In our opinion

ITO, WARD -47(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SUMIT JAISWAL, HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1541/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 I.T.O., Ward-47(2), Kolkata -Vs- Sumit Jaiswal [Pan: Alupj 0779 L] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS of Rs. 9165/- was deducted by the payer. This sum of Rs. 9,16,500/- representing contractual receipts was not shown by the assessee and accordingly, the Ld. AO estimated the profit at 40% thereon and made addition of Rs. 3,66,600/- in the assessment. The Ld. CIT(A) reduced the same

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the\nCOs of the assessee are partly allowed

bogus purchases. Accordingly, we uphold the order of Id.\nCIT (A) by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue on this issue. Ground\nno.3 of Revenue's appeal is dismissed.\n025. The issue raised by Revenue in Ground no.4 and 5, is against\nthe deletion of addition of ₹2,57,72,500/-, by the Id. CIT (A) as made

ITO, WARD-3(2),KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. M/S SUPER STAHL INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Bogus Purchase", which was added to the Total Income. The appellant's A.R has mainly reiterated the submissions made before the A.O that purchases are supported by the following documents with detailed statements were also produced to substantiate its claim of genuine purchases from the above - mentioned five parties. a. Purchase Bills; b Delivery Challans c. Details of vehicle which

ITO, WARD-3(2),KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. M/S SUPER STAHL INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Bogus Purchase", which was added to the Total Income. The appellant's A.R has mainly reiterated the submissions made before the A.O that purchases are supported by the following documents with detailed statements were also produced to substantiate its claim of genuine purchases from the above - mentioned five parties. a. Purchase Bills; b Delivery Challans c. Details of vehicle which

DCIT, CIR. -7(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S SHREE JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.591,592&593/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata.................................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Shreejee Jewellers Pvt. Ltd..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent 103, Park Street, Kolkata-700016. [Pan: Aaecs8312C] Appearances By: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 11, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 24, 2022 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders All Dated 23.06.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, The Appeals Pertained To The Same Assessee & Common Issues Are Involved & Hence, All These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order. The Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.591/Kol/2021 For Assessment Year 2007-08 Is Taken As The Lead Case. 2. Ita No.591/Kol/2021 - The Revenue In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

purchases is concerned. 12. Coming to the Ground No.1, the Revenue vide Ground No.1 has contested the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions made on unsecured loans and advances. We note that the ld. CIT(A) has given details of the documents furnished by the assessee in respect of each of the party and thereby has arrived

DCIT, CIR. -7(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S SHREE JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.591,592&593/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata.................................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Shreejee Jewellers Pvt. Ltd..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent 103, Park Street, Kolkata-700016. [Pan: Aaecs8312C] Appearances By: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 11, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 24, 2022 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders All Dated 23.06.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, The Appeals Pertained To The Same Assessee & Common Issues Are Involved & Hence, All These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order. The Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.591/Kol/2021 For Assessment Year 2007-08 Is Taken As The Lead Case. 2. Ita No.591/Kol/2021 - The Revenue In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

purchases is concerned. 12. Coming to the Ground No.1, the Revenue vide Ground No.1 has contested the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions made on unsecured loans and advances. We note that the ld. CIT(A) has given details of the documents furnished by the assessee in respect of each of the party and thereby has arrived

DCIT, CIR. -7(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S SHREE JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.591,592&593/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata.................................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Shreejee Jewellers Pvt. Ltd..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent 103, Park Street, Kolkata-700016. [Pan: Aaecs8312C] Appearances By: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 11, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 24, 2022 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders All Dated 23.06.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, The Appeals Pertained To The Same Assessee & Common Issues Are Involved & Hence, All These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order. The Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.591/Kol/2021 For Assessment Year 2007-08 Is Taken As The Lead Case. 2. Ita No.591/Kol/2021 - The Revenue In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

purchases is concerned. 12. Coming to the Ground No.1, the Revenue vide Ground No.1 has contested the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions made on unsecured loans and advances. We note that the ld. CIT(A) has given details of the documents furnished by the assessee in respect of each of the party and thereby has arrived

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DHANSAR ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

TDS etc. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the revenue preferred an appeal before us. 5. The Ld. D.R challenges the very impugned order on the following grounds: i) That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made u/s 69 of the Act amounting

ASHOK SARAF HUF,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-29(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm ]

purchased the diamond in question which cannot be called bogus because its physical existence is proved by the valuation made by the registered valuer dated 31.03.2014 and corroborative evidence has been placed on record. In the aforesaid scenario, I also note that a similar case of Monaj Begani V/s. ACIT, in ITA Nos. 932, 933 to 935 & 936/Kol/2017 order

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

bogus purchases made by the Income-tax Officer. Accordingly we quash the orders of the ITO and the CIT (Appeal) and delete the addition. This ground of appeal, therefore, succeeds. In view of the aforesaid facts and findings and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon herein above, we do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the order

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

bogus purchases made by the Income-tax Officer. Accordingly we quash the orders of the ITO and the CIT (Appeal) and delete the addition. This ground of appeal, therefore, succeeds. In view of the aforesaid facts and findings and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon herein above, we do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the order

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KAMARHATTY COMPANY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue (in Ground No

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Dr.A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2011-12

bogus. 6.8 We note that assessee has produced details, such as copy of vouchers of purchases of raw jute,invoices, delivery memo, ledger account, bank statement and deduction of TDS

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 4 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

bogus purchases. Accordingly, we uphold the order of ld. CIT (A) by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue on this issue. Ground no.3 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 025. The issue raised by Revenue in Ground no.4 and 5, is against the deletion of addition of ₹2,57,72,500/-, by the ld. CIT (A) as made