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

148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, thereby violating the statutory requirements and principles of natural justice. 6. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by failing to adjudicate the 6 ground that the Learned Assessing Officer passed the assessment order by erroneously applying the provisions of Section

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

148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, thereby violating the statutory requirements and principles of natural justice. 6. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred both in law and on facts by failing to adjudicate the 6 ground that the Learned Assessing Officer passed the assessment order by erroneously applying the provisions of Section

M/S. BLACKSTONE OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-5(1),, KOLKATA

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

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

bogus purchases. The assessee was given notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act. The assessee has not filed any reply. Thereafter, the order u/s 148A(d) of the Act was passed on 07.04.2022 and notice was finally issued u/s 148 of the Act on 07.04.2022 to the assessee after obtaining the approval from the competent authority i.e. PCIT, Kolkata

BLACKSTONE OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 5(1),, KOLKATA

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

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

bogus purchases. The assessee was given notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act. The assessee has not filed any reply. Thereafter, the order u/s 148A(d) of the Act was passed on 07.04.2022 and notice was finally issued u/s 148 of the Act on 07.04.2022 to the assessee after obtaining the approval from the competent authority i.e. PCIT, Kolkata

URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

bogus purchases. 2.4 Aggrieved with the assessment order the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) where he could get partial relief. Further aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A) both the assessee and Revenue have filed the appeals before this Tribunal. 3. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined

PRAMOD LAKRA DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD, KOLKATA

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

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

bogus purchases. 2.4 Aggrieved with the assessment order the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) where he could get partial relief. Further aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A) both the assessee and Revenue have filed the appeals before this Tribunal. 3. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined

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

Sections 68 and 69 C of the Act, and if the purchases are bogus, then it is not incumbent upon the Tribunal to restrict the disallowance only to confirm certain percentage of such purchases. The Special Leave Petition against the said decision was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of N. K. Protiens Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner

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

Sections 68 and 69 C of the Act, and if the purchases are bogus, then it is not incumbent upon the Tribunal to restrict the disallowance only to confirm certain percentage of such purchases. The Special Leave Petition against the said decision was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of N. K. Protiens Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner

BARDHAMAN DHARMARAJ PAPER MILL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT- CENTRAL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.160/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bardhaman Dharmaraj Paper Mill Pvt. Ltd.........................................……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069. [Pan: Aaecb0141J] Vs. Pcit (Central), Asansol......….…..…...................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate & Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Ghayasuddin, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 06, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 10, 2022 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 31.03.2021 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Pcit’) Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Brief Facts Are That The Assessment In This Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act To Verify The Transactions Of The Assessee With The Party M/S Siddhi Enterprises Due To Discrepancy Found In The Accounts. 3. The Assessing Officer Noted That The Assessee Had Failed To Prove The Genuineness Of The Purchases Made From M/S Siddhi Enterprises. However, He Further Noted That The Assessee Not Only Had Shown Such Purchases In The Books Of Account But Also Had Recorded Corresponding Sales Thereto. Therefore, The Assessing Officer Held That Since The

bogus purchases is in tune with the consistent view of the tribunal and different high courts in similar nature of cases. That being the case, in our view, the exercise of power under section.263 of the Act in the facts of the present case is invalid. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the leaned PCIT under section

M/S. DIACH CHEMICALS & PIGMENTS PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 148A of the Act dated 17.03.2022, wherein at page no. 4 of the notice the ld. AO has stated that M/s Saviri Ispat India Pvt. Ltd. has taken accommodation entry and brought back their unaccounted income into their regular books of accounts in the guise of bogus share/ share premium, unsecured loans etc. amounting

M/S. DIACH CHEMICALS & PIGMENTS PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 148A of the Act dated 17.03.2022, wherein at page no. 4 of the notice the ld. AO has stated that M/s Saviri Ispat India Pvt. Ltd. has taken accommodation entry and brought back their unaccounted income into their regular books of accounts in the guise of bogus share/ share premium, unsecured loans etc. amounting

SRI NIKHIL MAHESWARI,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Sri Nikhil Maheswari Bf-250, 2Nd Floor, Sector-1, Ito Ward 50(1) Central Circle-Block, Uttrapan Complex, Manicktalla Baisakhi Island Sali, Salt Lake, Civil Centre, Ultadanga, Kolkata- Vs. Bidhannagar, Kolkata-700064, 700054, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Bbzpm1050R Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Bansal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pampa Ray, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.02.2026

bogus purchases to the tune of ₹1,00,00,338/-. The case of the assessee was reopened for scrutiny by passing order u/s 148A(d) of the Act on 28.07.2022 after issuing show cause notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act. Notice was finally issued u/s 148 of the Act on 30.07.2022 to the assessee after obtaining the approval from

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. FLEX TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

purchase & sale bill to various entities. Based upon the statement, the AO issued notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act on 15.03.2022 to the assessee company inferring that the assessee company, M/s. Flex Trades Pvt. Ltd. was a beneficiary of bogus loan entries provided by AFL to the tune of Rs. 22,58,75,343/-. After that

KAMLAWATI CHOWHAN,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 46(1),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: the CIT(A). However, due to non-compliance on consecutive dates, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte. The assessee has now preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal, contending that the authorities below passed the orders without affording a reasonable opportunity to substantiate its claim with supporting evidence. The assessee, therefore, prayed that one more opportunity may be granted to substantiate its case before the Assessing Officer.

bogus purchases amounting to ₹ 20,06,616/-, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 148A(b) of the Act .As there

JCIT (IN-SITU), CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. TEZAS TRADING COMPANY PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both, the appeal of revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee, are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

bogus and thereby made the addition of entire purchases and sales shown by the assessee in commodity transactions. Further, the Assessing Officer added a sum of Rs.2,560/- u/s. 14A of the Act and further disallowed a sum of Rs.9,72,508/- claimed by the assessee as warehousing charges and thereby assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.23

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

bogus and such action is bad in law and in view of the facts and in the circumstances the addition so made is liable to be deleted and it may be held accordingly. 16. Without prejudice to Grounds No. 14 & 15 above, the payment made to the said vendor (i.e. Reeja Trading Private Ltd.) were through banking channel

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

bogus and such action is bad in law and in view of the facts and in the circumstances the addition so made is liable to be deleted and it may be held accordingly. 16. Without prejudice to Grounds No. 14 & 15 above, the payment made to the said vendor (i.e. Reeja Trading Private Ltd.) were through banking channel

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

bogus and such action is bad in law and in view of the facts and in the circumstances the addition so made is liable to be deleted and it may be held accordingly 16. Without prejudice to Grounds No. 14 & 15 above, the payment made to the said vendor (i.e. Reeja Trading Private Ltd.) were through banking channel

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

bogus and such action is bad in law and in view of the facts and in the circumstances the addition so made is liable to be deleted and it may be held accordingly. 16. Without prejudice to Grounds No. 14 & 15 above, the payment made to the said vendor (i.e. Reeja Trading Private Ltd.) were through banking channel