DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PRABIR ROY CHOWDHURY, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the CO of the assessee is partly

Bench: Sri Aby T.Varkey & Dr. A. L. Saini

bogus claim and for doing so invoked Section 41(1) of the Act for doing so. On appeal the Ld. 4 5 I.T.A.No.1407/Kol/2015 & C.O.No.60/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 CIT(A) took note of the provision of Section 41(1) of the Act and observed that the liability towards Sri Bimal Kumar Gupta of Rs.60 Lakhs was only

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S STANDARD LEATHER PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2010-11

section 41(1) or 68 of the Act.:- (i) That the purchase of the hides from the sundry creditors is evident from the purchase bills and books of accounts maintained by the appellant. As regards the treatment of the same as bogus

ITO WD 48(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI PUSPAL KUMAR DAS, HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, A.M. & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M.)

bogus purchases and has considered the difference in respect of the outstanding balance of these creditors on 31.03.2007 as cessation of liability u/s.41(1). It is however seen that the A.O. has while disallowing the same not only confused himself but has also not understood the applicability of section 41

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

bogus purchases. 39. The issue raised in ground nos. 4 & 5 is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 1 & 2 in ITA No. 1700/KOL/2025 A.Y. 2016-17, wherein we have dismissed the ground no. 1 & 2 of appeal of the revenue by upholding the order of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, our decision in ITA No. Balmukund

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

bogus purchases. 39. The issue raised in ground nos. 4 & 5 is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 1 & 2 in ITA No. 1700/KOL/2025 A.Y. 2016-17, wherein we have dismissed the ground no. 1 & 2 of appeal of the revenue by upholding the order of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, our decision in ITA No. Balmukund

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

bogus purchases. 39. The issue raised in ground nos. 4 & 5 is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 1 & 2 in ITA No. 1700/KOL/2025 A.Y. 2016-17, wherein we have dismissed the ground no. 1 & 2 of appeal of the revenue by upholding the order of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, our decision in ITA No. Balmukund

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

bogus purchases. 39. The issue raised in ground nos. 4 & 5 is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 1 & 2 in ITA No. 1700/KOL/2025 A.Y. 2016-17, wherein we have dismissed the ground no. 1 & 2 of appeal of the revenue by upholding the order of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, our decision in ITA No. Balmukund

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

bogus purchases. 39. The issue raised in ground nos. 4 & 5 is similar to one as decided by us in ground no. 1 & 2 in ITA No. 1700/KOL/2025 A.Y. 2016-17, wherein we have dismissed the ground no. 1 & 2 of appeal of the revenue by upholding the order of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, our decision in ITA No. Balmukund

ACIT, CC-2(1), KOL, KOLKATA vs. SHALIMAR HATCHERIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,......................Respondent 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, 17Th Floor, Everest House, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] - A N D - C.O. No. 13/Kol/2023 (In I.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,..................Cross Objector 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

41,07,380/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice under section 143(2) was issued on 04.09.2014, which was duly served upon the assessee. The ld. Assessing Officer thereafter issued a questionnaire by way of a notice under section 142(1). During the course of assessment proceeding, it revealed to the ld. Assessing

SRI TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O.,WARD-2(3), BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

purchase, if regarded as bogus then there is no liability in law and hence the question of applying section 41(1

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

purchase, if regarded as bogus then there is no liability in law and hence the question of applying section 41(1

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

purchase, if regarded as bogus then there is no liability in law and hence the question of applying section 41(1

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

purchase, if regarded as bogus then there is no liability in law and hence the question of applying section 41(1

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

purchase, if regarded as bogus then there is no liability in law and hence the question of applying section 41(1

TUM NATH SHAW,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2000-01 to 2004-05 are allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2043 To 2047/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2004-05 Tum Nath Shaw Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Burdwan, Kamala Kaminitala Lane, Nutanganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Burdwan-713102 Compound, Burdwan- 713101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps 2913 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" / Respondent) ..

purchase, if regarded as bogus then there is no liability in law and hence the question of applying section 41(1

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 ]

1-6-2015. 12 Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the aforesaid decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble High Court and in accordance with the amendment made in Section-263 of the Act with effect from 01.06.2015, I hold that the impugned assessment order dated 30.03.2015 passed

HIRALAL BHANDARI, LEGAL HAIR OF LATE CHAMPALAL BHANDARI,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-37, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

41,07,380/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice under section 143(2) was issued ITA No.261/KOL/2020, ITA Nos. 107, 108/KOL/2020, ITA No. 136/KOL/2020, ITA No. 23/KOL/2020, ITA Nos. 132 & 133/KOL/2021, ITA No. 2247/KOL/2017, ITA Nos. 2316, 2317/KOL/2019, ITA No. 2385/KOL/2019, ITA Nos. 2448, 2449/KOL/2019 on 04.09.2014, which was duly served upon

HIRALAL BHANDARI, LEGAL HAIR OF LATE CHAMPALAL BHANDARI,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-37, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Tarasafe International Private Limited,......................Appellant C/O. Dutta Properties, Budge Budge Trunk Road, Gobindpur, Kolkata-700141 [Pan:Aadct0645E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........................Respondent Circle-15(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107

41,07,380/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice under section 143(2) was issued ITA No.261/KOL/2020, ITA Nos. 107, 108/KOL/2020, ITA No. 136/KOL/2020, ITA No. 23/KOL/2020, ITA Nos. 132 & 133/KOL/2021, ITA No. 2247/KOL/2017, ITA Nos. 2316, 2317/KOL/2019, ITA No. 2385/KOL/2019, ITA Nos. 2448, 2449/KOL/2019 on 04.09.2014, which was duly served upon