ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. K K GROUP OF COMPANY PVT. LTD., SIKKIM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Kk Group Of Company Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Singtam Bazar, East Sikkim, 5Th Floor, 110, Shantipally, Vs. Singtam Forest Block, Singtam, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal S.O. 737134, Sikkim (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadck8867D Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.07.2025

bogus purchases when the identity and genuineness of the transactions were not established because none of the parties have responded to the notices issued u/s 133(6) of the Act. 04. The facts in brief are that the assessment u/s 147/ 143(3) of the Act was framed on 21.12.2018, assessing the total income at ₹22,76,130/-. The said

K.R.OVERSEAS PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-(CENTRAL)-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

bogus and disallowed. 24. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and in light of the aforesaid decisions, and in accordance with the amendment made in section 263 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 by way of Explanation 2, the assessment order of the A.Y. 2015-16 is held to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial

SHRI BUDHRAJ AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-43(6) , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the legal issue as well as on merit

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

revising the assessment u/s 263 of the Act. In our opinion, if the AO has examined the issue on the basis of documents furnished by the assessee and taken a plausible view then the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act is not available to Ld. Pr. CIT to set aside the assessment framed. The case of the assessee find support

BINA GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-10, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

bogus penny stock shares amounting to Rs. 5,58,860/- as unexplained cash credit and the unexplained expenditure on account of commission payment to the tune of Rs. 27,443/- u/s 69C of the Act by revising the assessment and directing the AO to reassess the income. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently submitted before us that

KUSUM GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

bogus penny stock shares amounting to Rs. 5,58,860/- as unexplained cash credit and the unexplained expenditure on account of commission payment to the tune of Rs. 27,443/- u/s 69C of the Act by revising the assessment and directing the AO to reassess the income. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently submitted before us that

DCIT, C.C.-3(4), KOLKATA vs. M/S TANISHQUE TRADE LINK PVT. LTD, HOWRAH

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 17/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tanishque Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata Vs Bhabatarini Apartment G.T. Road, Room No. 602 Howrah - 711201 [Pan : Aacct7512R] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/01/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 24/09/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Allowing The Bogus Share Capital Raised In The Books Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Failed To Discharge Its Primary Onus To Prove & Establish The Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Investor Companies & Genuineness Of The Transaction. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Ignoring That The Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Shareholders & Even The Genuineness Of The Transactions Remained Unexplained. 3. That On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Invoking His Powers U/S. 250(4) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 In Directing The Assessing Officer To Make Further Enquiry & Report The Results Of The

263 of the Act and called for all the details from the share applicants directly. The assessee discharged its primary onus by firstly filing the details and secondly all these details were filed directly to the Assessing Officer by all the share applicants. So far as the promoter directors of the assessee company are concerned, they have only invested Rs.50

APL METALS LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm I.T.A. No.297/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 Apl Metals Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, National C/O, Subash Agarwal & Faceless Assessment Centre, Associates, Advocates, Siddha Delhi. Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata- 700069. (Pan: Aacca4246P) (Appellant) (Respondent)

revised return filed. No interest u/s. 234A is chargeable as original return was filed within the due date. 5) The Ld AO. did not provide any opportunity to cross examine the witness through specifically asked for which is a serious flaw as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 6) Addition u/s 69C of the Act has been made

HILTON COMMODITIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Hilton Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward 5(3) 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Mercantile Building, Block-B, Chowringhee Square, Vs. 3Rd Floor, No.10, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacch1011P Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri S Datta, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

263 of the Act on the ground that the ld. AO has not conducted a requisite and proper enquiry qua the share capital received by the assessee during the instant financial year from its subscribers. We note that the ld. CIT (A) also noted that in similar other cases, similar amounts were taken and the assessment orders were revised. Therefore

M/S. A.P. FASHIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

revision order dated 20.03.2024 of the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central)-2, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. PCIT”] passed u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for AY 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its original return of income u/s

M/S. BHIKSHU POLYMERS PVT. LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS M/S. JEEVAN COMMOTRADE PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

bogus entries of name-lenders. iii. If the inquiries and investigations reveal that the identity of the creditors to be dubious or doubtful, or lack credit-worthiness, then the genuineness of the transaction would not be established. In such a case, the assessee would not have discharged the primary onus contemplated by section 68. [Para 11] In the instant case

RUSSEL CREDIT LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOL, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2018-19

revised return was filed on 2 Russel Credit Ltd. : AY: 2018-19 29.03.2019 at an income of Rs. 36,18,36,450/-. Thereafter, assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 08.03.2021 at an income of Rs. 39,76,74,478/-. Following this assessment order, a notice u/s 263 of the Act was issued on 30.11.2022 and thereafter

HIRANMOY DAS,DURGAPUR vs. PCIT, ASANSOL

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

Bench: 25.04.2022. 3. That There Is A Delay Of 728 (Seven Hundred & Twenty-Eight) Days In Filing The Appeal.

Revision Order u/s 263 as it is appealable and then immediately appeal was filed before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 6. That for an assessee like me the above benefit is immense and of enormous proportion if your Honour grants permission for decision on merit and hence I request your kind conscience for condonation of delay of 728 (SEVEN HUNDRED

PRIYA AGARWAL,HOWRAH vs. P.C.I.T.-13, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

263 of the Act. 6. Facts in brief are that the PCIT upon perusal of the assessment record came to the conclusion that the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) read with 147 of the Act dated 9.12.2019 is erroneous insofar as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue as the AO has failed to conduct any necessary

M/S SWIFT VINTRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-1I, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10

revised u/s . 263 of the IT Act, 1961 in view of the fact that requisite and proper inquiries were not conducted regarding the identity and creditworthiness of the share holders and the impugned order was passed mechanically without application of mind which rendered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The assessee filed a written submission

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

revised return of income on 05.09.2018, after taking the effect of the merger with M/s Nextgen Commosales Private limited as per NCLT order, declaring total income of ₹1,33,10,320/-. M/s Nextgen Commosales ITA Nos.1728 & 1729/KOL/2024 Dollar Holding Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 15-16 and 17-18 Private limited merged with the assessee company M/s Simplex Impex Private Limited with

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

revised return of income on 05.09.2018, after taking the effect of the merger with M/s Nextgen Commosales Private limited as per NCLT order, declaring total income of ₹1,33,10,320/-. M/s Nextgen Commosales ITA Nos.1728 & 1729/KOL/2024 Dollar Holding Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 15-16 and 17-18 Private limited merged with the assessee company M/s Simplex Impex Private Limited with

M/S. GATEWAY FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

263), the Court decided the issue against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. The assessee in this case submitted in support of the genuineness of the Long Term Capital Gain on Penny stock on direct evidence, such as the contract notes from the brokers, profit & loss A/c, Balance Sheet, computation of total income, proximate facts and circumstances surrounding

PINKY AGARWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

263), the Court decided the issue against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. The assessee in this case submitted in support of the genuineness of the Long Term Capital Gain on Penny stock on direct evidence, such as the contract notes from the brokers, profit & loss A/c, Balance Sheet, computation of total income, proximate facts and circumstances surrounding