ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIR.-1(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. MAHABIR PRASAD GUPTA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

TDS was made and hence it was under bonafide belief of no return filing. AO in the order u/s 147 alleged deposit of cash in bank account of Rs. 1,73,77.481/-as unexplained money

MAA SHARADA ENTERPRISE,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-50(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 586/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Maa Sharada Enterprise,……..………….……Appellant Talbabnda Jugberia, Ghola, North 24-Parganas, Pin Code No.700110, West Bengal [Pan:Aatfm5656M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-50(1), Kolkata, Income Tax Office, Manicktala, Civil Centre, Uttarapan Complex-Ds-Iv, Kolkata-700067 Appearances By: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kapil Mondal, Addl. Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 09, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: October 07, 2024 O R D E R

money His only doubt is qua the source of Rs.2,13,00,000/-, out of which he has made addition of Rs.1,29,00,000/- roughly. In the assessee’s line of business, cash is being generated regularly which depicts in the earlier year where assessee has deposited Rs.3.17 crores during the period from 8th November to 31st December

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1) , KOLKATA vs. P L G POWER LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Dy. Cit, Circle 5(1) Plg Power Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, 8 Th Floor, 6Th Floor, 11 Pollock Street P7, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700069 Kolkata-700001, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacg9903B Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri B. Satyanarayana Raju, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025

money during the year which has been treated as unexplained credit u/s 68, the addition of Rs.26,60,32,067/- is deleted. 5.0 Ground no.5 is about addition of Rs.3,46,96,171/- on account of manufacturing, selling and administrative expenses and sum of Rs.4,91,906/- on account of TDS

KWALITY CONSTRUCTION,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-33(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2009-10

TDS from the transportation charges in terms of provision of Sec.194C of the Act vis-à-vis 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The order of AO was confirmed by Ld. CIT(A). From the arguments placed by Ld. AR before us, we find that assessee has furnished fresh list of transport operators and as per the list in none

SHREE AUTOMOTIVE PRIVATE LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is allowed and appeal for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

TDS on the said genuine unsecured loan is completely unfounded, unjustified and untenable in law. 5. That, the Ld. CIT(A) further erred on facts and in law in having upheld the addition of Rs.4,12,50,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the specious ground of unexplained share application money

SHREE AUTOMOTIVE PRIVATE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-10. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is allowed and appeal for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

TDS on the said genuine unsecured loan is completely unfounded, unjustified and untenable in law. 5. That, the Ld. CIT(A) further erred on facts and in law in having upheld the addition of Rs.4,12,50,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the specious ground of unexplained share application money

SRI CHHANDAK CHAKRABORTY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-51(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

unexplained money of the assessee when he himself on the same set of facts/evidences has accepted identity, creditworthiness and ITA No.411 & 963/Kol/2016 A.Y.2008-09 Sh. Chhandak Chakraborty v. ITO Wd-51(4), Kol. Page 3 genuineness of the cheque deposit of Rs.40 lacs in the assessee's bank account by the said two ladies. (c) That the Ld. C.IT.(A) erred

ITO, WD-51(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI CHHANDAK CHAKRABORTY, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

unexplained money of the assessee when he himself on the same set of facts/evidences has accepted identity, creditworthiness and ITA No.411 & 963/Kol/2016 A.Y.2008-09 Sh. Chhandak Chakraborty v. ITO Wd-51(4), Kol. Page 3 genuineness of the cheque deposit of Rs.40 lacs in the assessee's bank account by the said two ladies. (c) That the Ld. C.IT.(A) erred

GRANADA AIR SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO,, WD-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result this ground of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara)

unexplained share application money. From a perusal of page 19 of the ld. CIT(A)’s order, we find that an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs has been introduced as share application money during the year. The ld. CIT(A) has analysed the facts and legal positions correctly. No evidence is filed by the assessee before us to prove

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, , ASANSOL vs. M/S. DIAMOND BOTTLING PLANT COMPANY, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.894/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit, Circle-2, Asansol Vs. M/S Diamond Bottling Plant Company C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Seven Brothers Lodge, P.O-Buroshibtala, P.S- Chinsurah, Hooghly, - 712105. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefd5674R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Sr. Dr Respondent By : Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11/12/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Asansol Dated 30.01.2019 Passed In Case No.58/Cit(A)/Asl/Dcit/Cir-2/Asl/15-16 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Grievance Seeks To Revive Assessing Officer’S Action Treating Assessee’S Loans Of Rs.11,85,00,000/- As Unexplained Cash Credits U/S 68 Which Has Been Reversed To The Extent Of Rs.5,26,50,251/- In The Cit(A)’S Order. Its Case Accordingly Is That The Assessing Officer Had Rightly Added The Assessee’S Total Loan Amount Of Rs. 11,85,00,000/- Raised From Four Entities M/S Diamond Carbon Pvt. Ltd., M/S Mukherjee Capital Pvt. Ltd., M/S Wimper Trading & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. & M/S Mukherjee Farms Pvt. Ltd.

TDS on the amount of interest outgoing to the lender companies and the entire transaction of loan transaction from the sister concerns which were through banking channel should have been accepted. The Ld. AR drew our attention to the chart filed by the AO to demonstrate that the partners of the assessee firm were holding substantial shareholding in the four

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

TDS on them. So, the assessee cannot be held as the beneficial owner of the money. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ambe Tradecorp (P) Ltd. Vs. PCIT [2022] 145 taxmann.com 27 (Gujarat) has held that, when the assessee is not the beneficiary of loan as the same is repaid to the party in subsequent year

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

TDS on them. So, the assessee cannot be held as the beneficial owner of the money. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ambe Tradecorp (P) Ltd. Vs. PCIT [2022] 145 taxmann.com 27 (Gujarat) has held that, when the assessee is not the beneficiary of loan as the same is repaid to the party in subsequent year

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

TDS on them. So, the assessee cannot be held as the beneficial owner of the money. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ambe Tradecorp (P) Ltd. Vs. PCIT [2022] 145 taxmann.com 27 (Gujarat) has held that, when the assessee is not the beneficiary of loan as the same is repaid to the party in subsequent year

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

TDS on them. So, the assessee cannot be held as the beneficial owner of the money. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ambe Tradecorp (P) Ltd. Vs. PCIT [2022] 145 taxmann.com 27 (Gujarat) has held that, when the assessee is not the beneficiary of loan as the same is repaid to the party in subsequent year

PBN CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,SILIGURI vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 3(1),, SILIGURI

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

TDS Rs. 1,08,42,694/-. ii) Difference of interest paid Rs. 1,42,337/- iii) Unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the act Rs. 1,04,55,206/- iv) Income from other source read with Section 68 of the Act Rs. 89,55,000/- v) Unexplained money

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GANGTOK vs. BHUMIKA RAI , NAMCHI, SIKKIM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Rakesh Mishra

money and added u/s 69A of the Act while the sum of Rs. 15,08,694/- for purchase of vehicle was added as unexplained deposit u/s 69 of the Act. Further, the commission income of Rs. 11,62,481/- from M/s Dish Infra Services Private Limited on which TDS

DEY TRADING CO.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 49(3), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

unexplained money for Rs. 1,04,403/-, concealed sales of ‘note pads’ for Rs. 1,00,000/-, outstanding liability appearing in the balance sheet for Rs. 8,99,080/- and on payment to parties without making TDS

ALLIANCE BOOKS SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,COOCHBEHAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1),, JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Alliance Books Suppliers Pvt. Acit, Circle 2(1) Ltd. Central Revenue Building, Race Khagrabari North, P.S. Kotwali Course Road, Jalpaiguri, Vs. Area Sardar, Coochbehar, West Bengal-735101 West Bengal-736101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadca1168P Assessee By : Shri Pranaved Sarkar, Advocate For Saumitro Chaudhry, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.12.2025

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and also confirming the interest of ₹1,70,676/- as made by the learned AO on account of bank interest to Central Bank of India. 2.2. The facts in brief are that the assessee company has purchased bank guarantees from Central bank of India secured by FDRs which were given to Govt deptts

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

unexplained money. 4. Facts in brief are that the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings observed from the bank statement of State Bank of India that the assessee has earned interest of Rs.6,57,501/- during the year under consideration. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued by the Assessing Officer on 4.12.2015 to explain

VINEET BAJORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(4), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.228, 229, 230 & 231/Kol/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vineet Bajoria, C/O. S.N.Ghosh Vs. Ito, Ward 45(4), Kolkata & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata Pan/Gir No. Adupb 1299 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr Dr

unexplained money. 4. Facts in brief are that the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings observed from the bank statement of State Bank of India that the assessee has earned interest of Rs.6,57,501/- during the year under consideration. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued by the Assessing Officer on 4.12.2015 to explain