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

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

sections": [ "143(2)", "142(1)", "37", "69C", "44AB" ], "issues": "Whether purchases from certain parties could be treated as bogus and added

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

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

D.C.I.T., CC - 3(1),, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

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

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

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

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

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

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and\nappeals of the revenue are dismissed

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

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

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

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

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3.1, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1),, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

section 142(2)\nmandates any such material adverse to the facts of assessee\ncollected by AO u/s 142(1) has to be necessarily put to the assessee\nu/s 142(3) before utilizing the same for assessment so as to\nconstitute as reliable material evidence through the process of\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act.\"\nSimilarly, in the case

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SAWANSUKHA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, CO of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Sawansukhajewellers Acit, Circle-7(1), Private Limited 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4Th Floor, 9, Camac Street, Vs. Kolkata-700069, Kolkata-700017, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcs2477R Co No. 32/Kol/2024 (Airing Out Of The Ita No. 1615/Kol/2024 For A.Y. 2018-19) Sawansukhajewellers Acit, Circle-7(1), Private Limited 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 4Th Floor, 9, Camac Street, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700017, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kapil Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2025

purchase transactions with two parties, Tanman Jewels Pvt. Ltd. and Saffron Gems Pvt. Ltd., totaling Rs 2,20,05,564/-. These transactions were flagged as potentially non-genuine. The assessee complied with the notice under section 148 by filing the return of income. Subsequent notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued, and the assessee responded accordingly. Investigation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJSHRI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

Section 148A(d) of the Act use a template/general reason to reject the defence of the assessee on merits, namely, "found devoid of any merit because the assessee company has failed to produce the relevant documents in respect of transactions mentioned in show cause notice it is established that the assessee has no proper explanation……" Consequently, this Court

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJSHRI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

Section 148A(d) of the Act use a template/general reason to reject the defence of the assessee on merits, namely, "found devoid of any merit because the assessee company has failed to produce the relevant documents in respect of transactions mentioned in show cause notice it is established that the assessee has no proper explanation……" Consequently, this Court

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

bogus purchases. In this haste, Ld. AO even forgot to note that the present assessee apart from making purchase from M/s. SDPL has also made sales to M/s. SDPL for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 which has been accepted by the AO. For AY 2011-12 where the alleged purchases from M/s. SDPL is Rs.2

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

bogus purchases. In this haste, Ld. AO even forgot to note that the present assessee apart from making purchase from M/s. SDPL has also made sales to M/s. SDPL for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 which has been accepted by the AO. For AY 2011-12 where the alleged purchases from M/s. SDPL is Rs.2

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

bogus purchases. In this haste, Ld. AO even forgot to note that the present assessee apart from making purchase from M/s. SDPL has also made sales to M/s. SDPL for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 which has been accepted by the AO. For AY 2011-12 where the alleged purchases from M/s. SDPL is Rs.2

NEZONE TUBES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

purchase order received by the assessee regarding the alleged sale. Therefore, in the absence of adequate evidence it cannot be concluded that this sale was actually made during the year and it was not an accommodation entry. 3.3 As per section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained