DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the\nCOs of the assessee are partly allowed

bogus purchases. Accordingly, we uphold the order of Id.\nCIT (A) by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue on this issue. Ground\nno.3 of Revenue's appeal is dismissed.\n025. The issue raised by Revenue in Ground no.4 and 5, is against\nthe deletion of addition of ₹2,57,72,500/-, by the Id. CIT (A) as made

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DHANSAR ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

TDS etc. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the revenue preferred an appeal before us. 5. The Ld. D.R challenges the very impugned order on the following grounds: i) That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made u/s 69 of the Act amounting

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, we uphold the order of ld. CIT (A) by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue on this issue. Ground no.3 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 025. The issue raised by Revenue in Ground no.4 and 5, is against the deletion of addition of ₹2,57,72,500/-, by the ld. CIT (A) as made

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, we uphold the order of ld. CIT (A) by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue on this issue. Ground no.3 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 025. The issue raised by Revenue in Ground no.4 and 5, is against the deletion of addition of ₹2,57,72,500/-, by the ld. CIT (A) as made

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 4 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, we uphold the order of ld. CIT (A) by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue on this issue. Ground no.3 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 025. The issue raised by Revenue in Ground no.4 and 5, is against the deletion of addition of ₹2,57,72,500/-, by the ld. CIT (A) as made

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, we uphold the order of ld. CIT (A) by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue on this issue. Ground no.3 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 025. The issue raised by Revenue in Ground no.4 and 5, is against the deletion of addition of ₹2,57,72,500/-, by the ld. CIT (A) as made

DEPUTY COMMISSOENR OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

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

purchases during the year, deploying its funds. There ought to be certain element of profit embedded in the sale transaction executed which must be brought to tax. 15. Considering the above submission of the ld. DR and taking a holistic view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find it proper to consider net profit element

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

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

purchases during the year, deploying its funds. There ought to be certain element of profit embedded in the sale transaction executed which must be brought to tax. 15. Considering the above submission of the ld. DR and taking a holistic view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find it proper to consider net profit element

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

TDS u/s 195 of the Act then all these expenses are to be allowed. Accordingly we restore this issue to the file of AO to examine and decide accordingly. The ground no. 3 is allowed for statistical purpose. 16. Issue raised in ground no. 4 by the assessee is against the confirmation

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

TDS u/s 195 of the Act then all these expenses are to be allowed. Accordingly we restore this issue to the file of AO to examine and decide accordingly. The ground no. 3 is allowed for statistical purpose. 16. Issue raised in ground no. 4 by the assessee is against the confirmation

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

TDS u/s 195 of the Act then all these expenses are to be allowed. Accordingly we restore this issue to the file of AO to examine and decide accordingly. The ground no. 3 is allowed for statistical purpose. 16. Issue raised in ground no. 4 by the assessee is against the confirmation

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

TDS u/s 195 of the Act then all these expenses are to be allowed. Accordingly we restore this issue to the file of AO to examine and decide accordingly. The ground no. 3 is allowed for statistical purpose. 16. Issue raised in ground no. 4 by the assessee is against the confirmation

ITO, WARD-3(1), ASANSOL vs. SANJAY TRANSPORT AGENCY, RANIGUNG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the cross- appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A No.567/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sanjay Transport Agency............................................................................….. Appellant 41, N.S.B. Road, Raniganj – 713347. [Pan: Aavfs6659N] Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), Asansol...............................................................…… …. Respondent I.T.A No.633/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito, Ward-3(1), Asansol............................................................................….. Appellant Vs. Sanjay Transport Agency...............................................................…… …. Respondent 41, N.S.B. Road, Raniganj – 713347. [Pan: Aavfs6659N] Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Adv. & Shri Aryan Kochar, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vivek Verma, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 13, 2023 आदेश / Order मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य "वारा / Per Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Filed By The Assessee & Cross Appeal Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Asansol Both Dated 22.09.2020 Are Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In Ita No.567/Kol/2020 Has Taken The Following 2. Grounds Of Appeal:

purchase invoices, payments are made through account payee cheques and mostly through banking channel, TDS wherever applicable have been deducted and deposited. Prayer was made that the book result declared by the assessee may be accepted and the addition sustained by the CIT(A) may be deleted. I.T.A No.567/Kol/2020 & I.T.A No.633/Kol/2020 Assessment year: 2010-11 Sanjay Transport Agency

SANJAY TRANSPORT AGENCY,RANIGANJ vs. ACIT, CIR. 3(1), ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the cross- appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A No.567/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sanjay Transport Agency............................................................................….. Appellant 41, N.S.B. Road, Raniganj – 713347. [Pan: Aavfs6659N] Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), Asansol...............................................................…… …. Respondent I.T.A No.633/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito, Ward-3(1), Asansol............................................................................….. Appellant Vs. Sanjay Transport Agency...............................................................…… …. Respondent 41, N.S.B. Road, Raniganj – 713347. [Pan: Aavfs6659N] Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Adv. & Shri Aryan Kochar, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vivek Verma, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 13, 2023 आदेश / Order मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य "वारा / Per Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Filed By The Assessee & Cross Appeal Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Asansol Both Dated 22.09.2020 Are Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In Ita No.567/Kol/2020 Has Taken The Following 2. Grounds Of Appeal:

purchase invoices, payments are made through account payee cheques and mostly through banking channel, TDS wherever applicable have been deducted and deposited. Prayer was made that the book result declared by the assessee may be accepted and the addition sustained by the CIT(A) may be deleted. I.T.A No.567/Kol/2020 & I.T.A No.633/Kol/2020 Assessment year: 2010-11 Sanjay Transport Agency

INDIA STEEL CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 35(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Purchase Parties about the involvement of the agent Shri Majhi, and in another case there has been denial of any agent. I also find that the Ld.A0 has not made any attempt to verity the authenticity of the said transactions of payment of commission by summoning the commission agent u/s 131(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. On analysis

ITO, WARD - 35(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDIA STEEL CORPORATION, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Purchase Parties about the involvement of the agent Shri Majhi, and in another case there has been denial of any agent. I also find that the Ld.A0 has not made any attempt to verity the authenticity of the said transactions of payment of commission by summoning the commission agent u/s 131(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. On analysis

SHARAD KUMAR SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 37(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Acit, Sharad Kumar Singh Circle-3(1), Income Tax Office 10A, Norode Behari Mullick Road, 3, Government Place, Vs. Kolkata-700006, West Bengal West Bengal-700001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Alqps3842K Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kapil Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.09.2025

TDS at source, the amount was liable to tax in terms of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and same was added to the income of the assessee. 3.2. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) affirmed the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. 3.3. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record

PANKAJ MUKHERJEE,DURGAPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1, , DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Dcit, Circle-1, Pankaj Mukherjee Aaykar Bhavan, Aykar Bithi, 1/9 Debinagar, Beniachity, City Centre, Durgapur, Vs. Kolkata-713213, West Bengal West Bengal 713216 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajopm7641Q Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2025

TDS deducted at source. Further, the reasons stated that as per AIR information, the assessee has deposited cash of ₹58,76,000/- in saving bank with Axis Bank Ltd. However, at schedule Pankaj Mukherjee; A.Y. 2010-11 AIR the assessee has declared cash deposit to be nil and hence, income of ₹59,09,935/- has escaped assessment. Accordingly, the statutory