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

24,182/- as made by the AO on account of bogus purchases. Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24 Balmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24 Balmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24 42.1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

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

24,182/- as made by the AO on account of bogus purchases. Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24 Balmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24 Balmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24 42.1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

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

24,182/- as made by the AO on account of bogus purchases. Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24 Balmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24 Balmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24 42.1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

OM FORGING & ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE PR. CIT-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

24. In the impugned order the CIT is of the opinion that the AO ought to have invoked the provisions of sec.69C of the Act and ought to have added the entire value of bogus purchases and that he failed to make enquiries while completing the assessment on the applicability of the provisions of Sec.69C

ACIT, CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. BHAWARLAL ALOKE KUMAR , KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15 Acit, Cicle-34, V/S. Bhawarlal Aloke Kumar Aayakar Poorva, 7Th P-12, New Howrah Bridge Approach Road, 4Th Floor, Floor, 110, Shantipally, Kolkatka-107 Kolkta-700001 [Pan No.Aadfb 0620 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant None ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-02-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 03-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee‘S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata’S Order Dated 23.01.2018 Passed In Case No.224/Cit(A)-10/C-34/14-15/16-17/Kol, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case Called Twice. None Appears At The Assessee’S Behest Despite The Registry Having Sent An Rpad Notice. It Is Accordingly Proceeded Ex Parte. 2. Revenue’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Challenge Correctness Of Cit(A)’S Action Partly Upholding Assessing Officer’S Findings Disallowing Assessee’S Purchase(S) Of ₹3,22,28,000/- Only To The Extent Of 15% Vide Impugned Following Detailed Discussion:- “06. Findings &. Decision:

section 69C of the Act as unexplained expenditure in respect or the aforesaid purchases. Consequently, ground 1 to 4 of the Revenue's appeal are dismissed. “ e. ACIT Vs. Ramila Praveen Shah Order dated OS.03.2015 of Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai Bench in ITA No. 5246/Mum/2013 "6. ----------- If the addition made by the AO. is accepted, then G.P. Ratio

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\nPage 31\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24\nBalmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24\nBalmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24\n42. 1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\nPage 31\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24\nBalmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24\nBalmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24\n42. 1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND LEASE FIN PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\nPage 31\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24\nBalmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24\nBalmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24\n42. 1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

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

24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\n42. 1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided by us in ground no.\n1 & 2 in ITA No. 1700/KOL/2025 A.Y. 2016-17, wherein we have\ndismissed the ground no. 1 & 2 of appeal of the revenue by upholding\nthe order of Id. CIT(A). Therefore

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\nPage 31\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24\nBalmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24\nBalmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24\n42. 1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\nPage 31\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24\nBalmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24\nBalmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24\n42. 1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\nPage 31\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24\nBalmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24\nBalmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24\n42. 1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\nPage | 31\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24\nBalmukund Cement & Roofings Private Limited AYs 15-16 to 21-22, 23-24\nBalmukund Sponge and Iron Private Limited; A.Y. 23-24\n42. 1. The issue raised is similar to one as decided

MANOJ BEGANI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 11. We note that other than aforesaid reason, no other statements of Shri Rajendra Jain or another were furnished to the assessee, despite they asking for it, which the Ld. CIT(A) at page 60 justified the omission of AO by stating that “the relevant material relating to appellant were already included

MANOJ BEGANI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 11. We note that other than aforesaid reason, no other statements of Shri Rajendra Jain or another were furnished to the assessee, despite they asking for it, which the Ld. CIT(A) at page 60 justified the omission of AO by stating that “the relevant material relating to appellant were already included

MANOJ BEGANI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 11. We note that other than aforesaid reason, no other statements of Shri Rajendra Jain or another were furnished to the assessee, despite they asking for it, which the Ld. CIT(A) at page 60 justified the omission of AO by stating that “the relevant material relating to appellant were already included

MANOJ BEGANI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 11. We note that other than aforesaid reason, no other statements of Shri Rajendra Jain or another were furnished to the assessee, despite they asking for it, which the Ld. CIT(A) at page 60 justified the omission of AO by stating that “the relevant material relating to appellant were already included

MANOJ BEGANI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 11. We note that other than aforesaid reason, no other statements of Shri Rajendra Jain or another were furnished to the assessee, despite they asking for it, which the Ld. CIT(A) at page 60 justified the omission of AO by stating that “the relevant material relating to appellant were already included