DEPUTY COMMISSOENR OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

132 of the Act, offered a summary discloser of income as undisclosed and the department accepted the summary surrender of income and thereafter advance tax for the said surrendered of income was also deposited, but thereafter it was contended by the assessee that the surrender was made under threat or coercion and that no incriminating material was found during

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

132 of the Act, offered a summary discloser of income as undisclosed and the department accepted the summary surrender of income and thereafter advance tax for the said surrendered of income was also deposited, but thereafter it was contended by the assessee that the surrender was made under threat or coercion and that no incriminating material was found during

KRYPTON DISTRIBUTORS LLP (EARLIER KNOWN AS KRYPTON DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 12(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Krypton Distributors Llp (Earlier Known As Krypton Ito, Ward 12(1), Distributors P. Ltd.) Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Flat No.1A, 1, Abdul Rasul Chowringhee Square, Vs. Avenue, Kalighat, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Kolkata-700026, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadck5298G Assessee By : Shri Manoj Katuruka, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.12.2025

TDS of ₹45,962/- deducted and net amount of ₹41,3,654/- was credited into the bank account of the assessee. In this background, now the issue before us is whether the sales consideration received by the assessee for 40 lacs 2% non-cumulative redeemable preference of M/s Easter (India) Chemicals Ltd. is genuine or liable to be added

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDUSTRIAL SAFETY PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

132 of the Income tax Act 1961 has been duly accounted for in books of accounts" It is observed that disclosure for the balance amount of stock amounting to Rs. 4,70,54,450/- was disclosed in the group company namely M/s New Horizon Ltd. in view of the above, penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB of the I.T.Act is initiated

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD., ,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT (TDS), CIRCLE - 4, DURGAPUR , DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

TDS amounting to Rs.2,96,39,555/-, he worked out the amount payable by the assessee for financial years 1992-93, 1997-98 and 1998-99 at Rs.1,16,03,337/-, Rs.48,60,132/- and Rs.2,60,82,232/- respectively. He also charged interest under section

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD., ,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT (TDS), CIRCLE - 4, DURGAPUR , DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

TDS amounting to Rs.2,96,39,555/-, he worked out the amount payable by the assessee for financial years 1992-93, 1997-98 and 1998-99 at Rs.1,16,03,337/-, Rs.48,60,132/- and Rs.2,60,82,232/- respectively. He also charged interest under section

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD., ,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT (TDS), CIRCLE - 4, DURGAPUR , DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

TDS amounting to Rs.2,96,39,555/-, he worked out the amount payable by the assessee for financial years 1992-93, 1997-98 and 1998-99 at Rs.1,16,03,337/-, Rs.48,60,132/- and Rs.2,60,82,232/- respectively. He also charged interest under section

WELKIN TELECOM INFRA PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rjesh Kumar, Am ]

Section 37 (3A) was not applicable. " 33. Following the decision cited (supra), we allow the claim of the assessee. Ground No. 5 therefore stands allowed. 17 Welkin Telecom Infra Pvt. Ltd. AY 2014-15 34. Ground no. 6 of assessee’s appeal is against the disallowance of Balance written off of Rs.2,14,904/-. Brief facts as noted

DCIT, CC-2(3), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. MAXCAB INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Maxcab Industries Pvt. Ltd. 4Th Floor, 110 Shantipally, 67/C, Balaram Dey Street, E.M. Bypass, Vs. West Bengal-700006 West Bengal-700107 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aancm1997Q Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Ms. Nandini Surekh, Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Ars Revenue By : Praveen Kishore, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2025

132(1) of the Act aswell as survey under section 133A of the Act, 1961 on 15.03.2022 and subsequent dates, at the office premises of "Goel Group of cases' at "Unit No. 12/4, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata - 700 107 and other places as well as at the residential premises of its Directors namely, Devendra Goel, Devash Goel, Purushottam Dass Goel

METALIND PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1241/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & I.T.A. No. 1242/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Metalind Private Ltd...........……………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant 51, Canal East Road Kolkata – 700 085 [Pan : Aaccm 2883 J] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Kolkata.......…..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Singh, Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 12Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 10Th , 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 1, Kolkata, (Ld. Pr. Cit) Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Both Dt. 22/03/2017, For The Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. Both These Appeals Belong To The Same Assessee. Hence For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Company & Is In The Business Of Real Estate & Related Activities. It Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12 On 29/09/2011, Declaring Nil Income & For The Assessment Year 2012-13 On 29/09/2012, Declaring Total Income Of Rs.5,48,59,970/-. A Search & Seizure Operation Was Conducted U/S 132 Of The Act On The Assessee On 04/10/2012. Consequentially Notice U/S 153A Of The Act, Were Issued & The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income In Response Thereto Declaring The Same Income As That Disclosed By It In The Original Return Of Income For Both The Assessment Years. The Assessing

Section 153 A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment.” 38. The present appeals concern

METALIND PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1241/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & I.T.A. No. 1242/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Metalind Private Ltd...........……………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant 51, Canal East Road Kolkata – 700 085 [Pan : Aaccm 2883 J] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Kolkata.......…..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Singh, Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 12Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 10Th , 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 1, Kolkata, (Ld. Pr. Cit) Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Both Dt. 22/03/2017, For The Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. Both These Appeals Belong To The Same Assessee. Hence For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Company & Is In The Business Of Real Estate & Related Activities. It Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12 On 29/09/2011, Declaring Nil Income & For The Assessment Year 2012-13 On 29/09/2012, Declaring Total Income Of Rs.5,48,59,970/-. A Search & Seizure Operation Was Conducted U/S 132 Of The Act On The Assessee On 04/10/2012. Consequentially Notice U/S 153A Of The Act, Were Issued & The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income In Response Thereto Declaring The Same Income As That Disclosed By It In The Original Return Of Income For Both The Assessment Years. The Assessing

Section 153 A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment.” 38. The present appeals concern

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. DAILMER INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Dailmer Industries Private Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Limited 4Th Floor, Room No. 403, 67/C, Balaram Dey Street, Vs. Kolkata-700107, West Bengal Kolkata-700006, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcd0836D Assessee By : S/Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Nirav Sheth, Ars Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.07.2025

132(1) of the Act aswell as survey under section 133A of the Act, 1961 on 15.03.2022 and subsequent dates, at the office premises of "Goel Group of cases' at "Unit No. 12/4, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata - 700 107 and other places as well as at the residential premises of its Directors namely, Devendra Goel, Devash Goel, Purushottam Dass Goel

M/S SALARPURIA PROPERTIES PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL -2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

132 of the Income Tax Act. A notice under 1 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 M/s. Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Limited section 153A of the Income Tax Act was issued and served upon the assessee. In response to the notice, the assessee has filed its return electronically declaring total income at Rs.1,50,00,160/- on 16.10.2017. The ld. Assessing Officer

SRI SURYA PRAKASH BAGLA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR-VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 398/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Surya Prakash Bagla -Vs- Dcit, Central Circle-Vii, Kolkata [Pan: Aebpb 4558 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

132 of the Act including the residential and business premises of the assessee. Subsequently, the parties entered into a settlement pursuant to which T.S No. 216 of 2007 was dismissed and the other TS No. 222 of 2007 was decreed. Under the terms of settlement, the transferor agreed to transfer the 100% shares except 30 shares to the transferee, handover

DCIT, CC-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DAILMER INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

section 132(4)/131 of the Act on 16.03.2022 and 10.05.2022. I have carefully gone through the submissions of the appellant company with respect to the alleged statements. At the outset, it has been brought to my notice that the said Deepak Goel was not a director of the appellant company and the reply to the statement recorded

DCIT, CC-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DAILMER INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

section 132(4)/131 of the Act on 16.03.2022 and 10.05.2022. I have carefully gone through the submissions of the appellant company with respect to the alleged statements. At the outset, it has been brought to my notice that the said Deepak Goel was not a director of the appellant company and the reply to the statement recorded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AVIMA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

132(4) of the Act in the search operation in the case of said entry operators, and was not in relation to the asst. proceedings against the assessee conducted by the AO. It is noticed that the AO had only relied upon the said recorded statement only.\n6.2.12.Further, the AO had not given opportunity to the assessee for cross examination

DCIT, CIR-26, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TEWARI WAREHOUSING COMPANY, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands allowed partly for statistical

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11 Dcit, Circle-26 M/S Tewari Warehousing Co. बनाम / Aayakar Bhawan Hide Shed Dump, Old V/S. Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Goragacha Road, Kolkata-88 Road, (South), [Pan No.Aacft 5579 K] Kolkata-68 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Arindam Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Vikash Surana, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 31-01-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 16-03-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata Dated 14.03.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Jcit, Range- 53, Kolkata U/S 143(3)/144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.03.2013 For Assessment Year 2010-11. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Per Its Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing To Assess The Entire Gross Receipts S Business Income & Allow Deductions As Per Section 28 To 43 Of The It Act When Rental Income Of Rs.2,31,00,000/- Was Already Included In The Gross Receipts. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Estimation Of Business Profits Of Rs.2,37,72,132/- Made By The Ao Though Rejection Of Assessee’S Books Of Account U/S 145(3) Considering The Facts Of The Case. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A)’S Order Is Contrary To The Law & Fact Of The Case. 4. The Appellant Craves Leaves To, Add To, Alter Or Modify Any One Or All Of The Grounds Of Appeal Mentioned Above.”

Section 28 to 43 of the IT Act when rental income of Rs.2,31,00,000/- was already included in the gross receipts. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the estimation of business profits of Rs.2,37,72,132/- made by the AO though rejection of assessee’s books of account u/s 145(3) considering the facts