DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

11. The issue raised in ground nos.1, 2 and 5 are general in nature 12. The issue raised in ground no.3 & 4 is against the restriction of addition to ₹1,47,000/- by the ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO on the basis of WhatsApp chats. 12.1. The issue raised in this appeal is similar to ground

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

11. The issue raised in ground nos.1, 2 and 5 are general in nature 12. The issue raised in ground no.3 & 4 is against the restriction of addition to ₹1,47,000/- by the ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO on the basis of WhatsApp chats. 12.1. The issue raised in this appeal is similar to ground

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

11. The issue raised in ground nos.1, 2 and 5 are general in nature 12. The issue raised in ground no.3 & 4 is against the restriction of addition to ₹1,47,000/- by the ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO on the basis of WhatsApp chats. 12.1. The issue raised in this appeal is similar to ground

GOPAL & SONS HUF,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 32(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

11. The issue raised in ground nos.1, 2 and 5 are general in nature 12. The issue raised in ground no.3 & 4 is against the restriction of addition to ₹1,47,000/- by the ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO on the basis of WhatsApp chats. 12.1. The issue raised in this appeal is similar to ground

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Section 292C of the\nAct, the presumption is to be drawn in respect of WhatsApp\ntransactions in the hands of the person from whose possession or\ncontrol the books of accounts/ documents, etc. are found. Even the\npresumption u/s 292C of the Act is rebuttable when the assessee\nproved that he has not done any such transactions even in respect

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALAJEE MINI STEELS & REROLLING PRIVATE LIMITED , PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita Nos.1688 To 1691/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2018-19)\Nita No. 1725/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Year: 2016-17)\Ndcit, Central Circle 4(3)\Nbalajee Mini Steels & Rerolling\Naaykar Bhawan Poorva, 110,\Nprivate Limited\Nshantipally, Kolkata-700107,\N603, Shantikunj Apartment,\Nkolkata\Nphulwanipatna, G.P.O.800001,\Nvs.\N(Appellant)\Npatna\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Aabcb7265J\Nassessee By\N:\Nshri Manish Rastogi, Ar\Nrevenue By\N:\Ns/Shri Praveen Kishore &\Npradeep Dungdung, Drs\Ndate Of Hearing:\N01.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement:\N15.12.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\Nthese Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)"] Dated 13.04.2025 For The Ays 2015-16 To 2018-19.\Nas The Facts & Issues In All The Appeals Of Revenue Are Exactly Identical, Hence, For The Sake Of Brevity, We Take Ita No. 1688/Kol/2025 For A.Y. 2015-16 & Decide The Issue Accordingly.\Nα.Υ. 2015-16\Npage 2\Nita Nos.1688 To 1691/Kol/2025&1725/Kol/2025\Nbalajee Mini Steels & Rerolling Private Limited; Ays 2015-16 To 2018-19\Nita No. 1688/Kol/2025\N3.\Nthe Only Issue Raised By The Revenue Is Against The Deletion Of Addition By The Id. Cit (A) Of ₹1,07,03,817/- As Made By The Id. Ao On Account Of Suppression Of Income In Respect Of Bogus Purchases.\N3.

section 68 of the Act\nIn the firat appellate stage the assessee submitted ledger account copy,\nconfirmation of accounts and also furnished their Sales Tax registration number\nThe Commissioner (Appeals) held that these transactions were trading\ntransactions and not financial transactions, as such, cannot be added under\nsection 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. BALAJEE MINI STEELS & REROLLING PRIVATE LIMITED , PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita Nos.1688 To 1691/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2018-19)\Nita No. 1725/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Year: 2016-17)\Ndcit, Central Circle 4(3)\Nbalajee Mini Steels & Rerolling\Naaykar Bhawan Poorva, 110,\Nprivate Limited\Nshantipally, Kolkata-700107,\N603, Shantikunj Apartment,\Nkolkata\Nvs.\Nphulwanipatna, G.P.O.800001,\N(Appellant)\Npatna\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Aabcb7265J\Nassessee By\Nshri Manish Rastogi, Ar\Nrevenue By\Ns/Shri Praveen Kishore &\Npradeep Dungdung, Drs\Ndate Of Hearing: 01.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement: 15.12.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\Nthese Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Orders Of\Nthe Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27 (Hereinafter\Nreferred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)"] Dated 13.04.2025 For The Ays 2015-16\Nto 2018-19.\Nas The Facts & Issues In All The Appeals Of Revenue Are Exactly\Nidentical, Hence, For The Sake Of Brevity, We Take Ita No.\N1688/Kol/2025 For A.Y. 2015-16 & Decide The Issue Accordingly.\Nα.Υ. 2015-16\Npage 2\Nita Nos.1688 To 1691/Kol/2025&1725/Kol/2025\Nbalajee Mini Steels & Rerolling Private Limited; Ays 2015-16 To 2018-19\Nita No. 1688/Kol/2025\N3.\Nthe Only Issue Raised By The Revenue Is Against The Deletion Of\Naddition By The Id. Cit (A) Of ₹1,07,03,817/- As Made By The Id. Ao\Non Account Of Suppression Of Income In Respect Of Bogus Purchases.\N3.

section 68 of the Act\nIn the firat appellate stage the assessee submitted ledger account copy,\nconfirmation of accounts and also furnished their Sales Tax registration number\nThe Commissioner (Appeals) held that these transactions were trading\ntransactions and not financial transactions, as such, cannot be added under\nsection 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALAJEE MINI STEELS & REROLLING PRIVATE LIMITED , PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita Nos.1688 To 1691/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2018-19)\Nita No. 1725/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Year: 2016-17)\Ndcit, Central Circle 4(3)\Nbalajee Mini Steels & Rerolling\Naaykar Bhawan Poorva, 110,\Nprivate Limited\Nshantipally, Kolkata-700107,\N603, Shantikunj Apartment,\Nkolkata\Nphulwanipatna, G.P.O.800001,\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Npatna\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Aabcb7265J\Nassessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar\Nrevenue By : S/Shri Praveen Kishore &\Npradeep Dungdung, Drs\Ndate Of Hearing: 01.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement: 15.12.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\Nthese Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Orders Of\Nthe Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27 (Hereinafter\Nreferred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)"] Dated 13.04.2025 For The Ays 2015-16\Nto 2018-19.\Nas The Facts & Issues In All The Appeals Of Revenue Are Exactly\Nidentical, Hence, For The Sake Of Brevity, We Take Ita No.\N1688/Kol/2025 For A.Y. 2015-16 & Decide The Issue Accordingly.\Nα.Υ. 2015-16\Npage 2\Nita Nos.1688 To 1691/Kol/2025&1725/Kol/2025\Nbalajee Mini Steels & Rerolling Private Limited; Ays 2015-16 To 2018-19\Nita No. 1688/Kol/2025\N3.\Nthe Only Issue Raised By The Revenue Is Against The Deletion Of\Naddition By The Id. Cit (A) Of ₹1,07,03,817/- As Made By The Id. Ao\Non Account Of Suppression Of Income In Respect Of Bogus Purchases.\N3.

section 68 of the Act\nIn the firat appellate stage the assessee submitted ledger account copy,\nconfirmation of accounts and also furnished their Sales Tax registration number\nThe Commissioner (Appeals) held that these transactions were trading\ntransactions and not financial transactions, as such, cannot be added under\nsection 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED , PATNA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Section 292C of the\nAct, the presumption is to be drawn in respect of WhatsApp\ntransactions in the hands of the person from whose possession or\ncontrol the books of accounts/ documents, etc. are found. Even the\npresumption u/s 292C of the Act is rebuttable when the assessee\nproved that he has not done any such transactions even in respect

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

11,83,288/- respectively, by\napplying the gross profit rate shown by the assessee as against the\ntotal addition of Rs.30,00,000/- and ₹70,10,000/- respectively made by\nthe learned AO u/s 69A of the Act on the basis of WhatsApp Chats.\n51. 1. We have allowed the assessee's appeal on this issue in ground\nno. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

11 above and it\nmay be held accordingly.\n14. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld.\nAO was wholly unjustified in making addition of Rs.,\n1,20,95,958/- [treating the purchases made from Reeja\nTrading Private Ltd. as bogus purchase) merely based on the\nreport of CGST Department without conducting any enquiry.\n/Verification

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC - 3(3),, KOLKATA

11 above and it\nmay be held accordingly.\n14. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld.\nAO was wholly unjustified in making addition of Rs.,\n1,20,95,958/- [treating the purchases made from Reeja\nTrading Private Ltd. as bogus purchase) merely based on the\nreport of CGST Department without conducting any enquiry.\nVerification

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

11,83,288/- respectively, by\napplying the gross profit rate shown by the assessee as against the\ntotal addition of Rs.30,00,000/- and ₹70,10,000/- respectively made by\nthe learned AO u/s 69A of the Act on the basis of WhatsApp Chats.\n51. 1. We have allowed the assessee's appeal on this issue in ground\nno. 2

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

11 above and it\nmay be held accordingly.\n14. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld.\nAO was wholly unjustified in making addition of Rs.,\n1,20,95,958/- [treating the purchases made from Reeja\nTrading Private Ltd. as bogus purchase) merely based on the\nreport of CGST Department without conducting any enquiry.\n/Verification

SAROJ EMBRODS PRIVATE LIMITED. ,HOOGHLY vs. DCIT,C.C-3(4), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

section 147 of the Act. The legal ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. Issue raised in ground no. 2,3& 4 are not merit and against the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition as made by AO. 13. Facts in brief are that the assessee made purchases from these concerns during the year which was duly

M/S. SAROJ EMBRODS PVT. LTD. ,HOOGHLY vs. DCIT, C.C-3(4), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

section 147 of the Act. The legal ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. Issue raised in ground no. 2,3& 4 are not merit and against the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition as made by AO. 13. Facts in brief are that the assessee made purchases from these concerns during the year which was duly

ITO, WARD-1(2),, SILIGURI vs. BINOY AGARWAL, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

11. The AO has also held that the purchases themselves were not bogus\nthough the parties from whom the purchases were made by the Respondent\nwere found to be bogus. He has treated them as bogus parties because these\nparties were not produced during the assessment proceedings\n12. The ITAT has come to a factual finding that though the suppliers

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

11 above and it\nmay be held accordingly.\n14. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld.\nAO was wholly unjustified in making addition of Rs.,\n1,20,95,958/- [treating the purchases made from Reeja\nTrading Private Ltd. as bogus purchase) merely based on the\nreport of CGST Department without conducting any enquiry.\n/Verification