A.C.I.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S ESTIN TIE UP PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

capital gains of ₹89,11,086/- besides other income. Subsequently, the return was selected for scrutiny and order u/s 143(3) of the Act was passed wherein the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') made an addition

SHUVRO CHATTARAJ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT , BURDWAN

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2015-16

gain on transfer of long term capital Assets in earlier Assessment Year 2013-14 and 2014-15 to rely on his judgment. That even otherwise Ld. Pr. CIT erred on facts too. 7. That the appellant carves leave to add alter, modifying or omit any ground of appeal and/or adduce the additional evidence(s) during the appellate proceeding

RUSSEL CREDIT LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOL, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2018-19

Capital Gain', irrespective of period of bolding, with a view to avoid disputes/litigation and to maintain uniform approach. 3. It is, however, clarified that the above would not be necessarily applied in the situations where: i. the genuineness of transactions in unlisted shares itself is questionable; or ii. the transfer of unlisted shares is related to an issue pertaining

RITA GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR.2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

capital gain on sale of unquoted shares was rejected. 3. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed return of income on 31.07.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 18,31,980/-. Pertinent to note that a search action u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 13.03.2014 at the residential and office premises of the IRC group

M/S. GATEWAY FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

income in the garb of long term capital gain. The gain has accordingly to be assessed as undisclosed credit u/s 68. In view of the above discussion, I find no infirmity in the orders of the Ld. AO, and I confirm the same, holding the claim of STCL of Rs.16,40,62,61/- to be bogus. Therefore this ground

PRATIK AGARWAL BENEFICIARY TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, C.C.-3(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

income in the garb of long term capital gain. The gain has accordingly to be assessed as undisclosed credit u/s 68. In view of the above discussion, I find no infirmity in the orders of the Ld. AO, and I confirm the same, holding the claim of STCL of Rs.16,40,62,61/- to be bogus. Therefore this ground

PINKY AGARWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

income in the garb of long term capital gain. The gain has accordingly to be assessed as undisclosed credit u/s 68. In view of the above discussion, I find no infirmity in the orders of the Ld. AO, and I confirm the same, holding the claim of STCL of Rs.16,40,62,61/- to be bogus. Therefore this ground

M/S. NISHIT AGARWAL BENEFICIARY TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

income in the garb of long term capital gain. The gain has accordingly to be assessed as undisclosed credit u/s 68. In view of the above discussion, I find no infirmity in the orders of the Ld. AO, and I confirm the same, holding the claim of STCL of Rs.16,40,62,61/- to be bogus. Therefore this ground

RAI BHAGWAN DAS BAGLA BAHADURS MARWARI HINDU HOSPITAL,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 49(3) NOW, I.T.O., WARD - 44(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Rai Bhagwan Das Bagla Ito, Ward-49(3), Bahadurs Marwari Hindu 3, Govt. Place (West), Hospital Kolkata-700001, Vs. 1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Martin West Bengal Burn House, Kolkata-700001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aactr1297C Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhary, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.12.2024

Capital Gain. Consequently, the order of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and AO is directed to delete the addition. The ground no. 5 & 6 are allowed. 012. The issue raised in Ground no.7 is against the order of ld. AO, treating the income

RAM NIRANJAN BANKA,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 40,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ram Niranjan Banka Acit, Circle-40 1, Surti Bagan Street, Jorasanko, 3, Govt. Place (West), Vs. Kolkata-700073, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aedpb5273P Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.11.2025

income on sale thereof has been assessed to be in the nature of short term capital gains, after reducing proportionate amount of capital gains from cost as per Section 54 (1) (ii) of the Act for transfer within a period of three years of its purchase or construction which is totally unlawful and erroneous in view of the facts

ZAFAR IQBAL,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

capital gain could be\nmade within the time provided under section 139, i.e. within the\nperiod provided for filing the return during the extended period or for\nfiling a revised return u/s 139(4)/139(5) of the Act and as the\nassessee had acquired the property within the limitation date of filing\nof the revised return, the deduction under

RAMAUTAR SARAF (HUF),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 59(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Capital Gains Account Scheme\nTotal deduction claimed u/s 54 of the Act,\nAmount (Rs.)\n2,80,70,000\n5,72,500\n2,60,10,000\n5,46,52,500\n4.1. The Id. AO further noted that the assessee made payment of\n₹2,80,70,000/- to Bangalore NRI Complex Ltd. (Urbana Township) for\npurchase of land for construction

SWETA SONTHALIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Not to be charged on investment in certain bonds (2015 Amendment) - Assessment year 2009-10 - Whether amendment to section 54EC brought with effect from 1-4-2015 restricting investment in assets from sale consideration on sale of original asset to Rs. 50 lakhs is prospective in nature, thus; prior to assessment year

BEGRAJ AGARWAL & ORS HUF,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 34(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 34(1), Kolkata Begraj Agarwal & Ors. Huf Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, 110, Diamond Heritage, Unit No.609, Strand Road, Kolkata-700001 Shantipally, Kolkata-700107, Vs. West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabhb8295F Assessee By : Shri S.M. Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Amuldeep Kaur, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2025

additions in the assessment order passed u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Act by ignoring the fact that the entire assessment proceeding u/s 147 of the Act were invalid and bad in law. 03. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 29.07.2013, declaring total income at ₹8,71,380/- under

SAROJ GOENKA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 30(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

addition by allowing exemption u/s 54F\nas claimed by the assessee.\n24. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.\nKolkata, the 12th January, 2026.\nSd/-\n[Pradip Kumar Choubey]\nJudicial Member\nSd/-\n[Rajesh Kumar]\nAccountant Member\nDated: 12.01.2026.\nRS", "summary": { "facts": "The assessee sold shares of Emami Ltd. incurring a long-term capital gain

HARSHAD MANSUKHLAL SHAH. ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CIR-29,KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 948/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Harshad Mansukhlal Shah Acit, Circle-29, Kolkata 1208, C2 Wing Sheetal Nath Vs Gordia Nagar, Kurla Mumbai - 700077 [Pan : Alops0164Q] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Swapan Kumar Bera, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 10/12/2021, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 577 Days. On The Last Date Of Hearing I.E., 21/03/2024, The Bench After Considering The Condonation Application & Other Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Has Condoned The Delay In Filing Of The Instant Appeal Vide Its Order Dt. 21/03/2024, Which Forms Part Of The Record. Thus, We Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erred In Accepting The View Of The Ao That The Disclosed Short-Term Capital Gain Of Rs. 18,67,181/- As Business Income Of Rs. 18,67,181/-.

addition, alteration modification of the grounds either before the appellate proceedings or in course of appellate proceedings.” 4. Facts in brief are that the assessee is a senior citizen earning income from short terms capital gain

BANI BROTO BANERJEE ,KOLKATA vs. CIT(A), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 520/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Bani Broto Banerjee,…………………..…………Appellant Sanskriti, Flat – 3A, 148, Rashbehari Avenue, Near Deshapriya Park, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Abppb0424P] -Vs.- Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals),……Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Ranu Bisws, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 24, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 O R D E R

income from 'house property', whereas, the cost of the same asset is taken into consideration when it is sold and capital gains are computed under section 48. We do not have even a slightest doubt that the interest in question is indeed an expenditure in acquiring the asset. Since both provisions are altogether different, the assessee in the instant case

SAROJ BAID,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, J & Dr. Manish Borad

addition made by the Ld. A.O. u/s.68 of the Act in respect of sale proceeds of shares of NCL Research & Financial Services Ltd. treating the same as income from undisclosed sources after rejecting the assessee's claim of Long Term Capital Gains