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

37,59,130/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO in respect of bogus Purchases. 28.1. The issue raised in ground no.1 of this appeal of Revenue is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 2 of ITA No. 1595/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 (supra). Accordingly, our decision would, mutatis mutandis, apply to ground no.1

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

37,59,130/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO in respect of bogus Purchases. 28.1. The issue raised in ground no.1 of this appeal of Revenue is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 2 of ITA No. 1595/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 (supra). Accordingly, our decision would, mutatis mutandis, apply to ground no.1

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

37,59,130/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO in respect of bogus Purchases. 28.1. The issue raised in ground no.1 of this appeal of Revenue is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 2 of ITA No. 1595/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 (supra). Accordingly, our decision would, mutatis mutandis, apply to ground no.1

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

37,59,130/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO in respect of bogus Purchases. 28.1. The issue raised in ground no.1 of this appeal of Revenue is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 2 of ITA No. 1595/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 (supra). Accordingly, our decision would, mutatis mutandis, apply to ground no.1

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

37,59,130/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO in respect of bogus Purchases. 28.1. The issue raised in ground no.1 of this appeal of Revenue is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 2 of ITA No. 1595/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 (supra). Accordingly, our decision would, mutatis mutandis, apply to ground no.1

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 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961-----------·-------------·------------ ----- -.------- -------------.--- - whether merely because suppliers had not appeared before Assessing Officer or Commissioner (Appeals), it could not be concluded that purchases were not made by assessee - Held, yes [Para 71 [In favour of assessee. The above decision squarely applies to the case of the assessee as entire sales in case of assessee

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

37,24,182/- as made by\nthe AO on account of bogus purchases.\nPage 31\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

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

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

37,24,182/- 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

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

37,24,182/- 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

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,\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\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

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

37,24,182/- 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

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

37,24,182/- 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

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

37,24,182/- 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

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

37,24,182/- 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

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

37,24,182/- 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

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

37,24,182/- 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