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

capital loss /long- term capital gains as the case may be, we note that apart from placing reliance on the statements, the revenue authorities have also referred to the report of the investigation Wing which carried out search and survey in some other cases prior to the conclusion of assessment proceedings in the instant appeals and such investigation included

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

capital loss /long- term capital gains as the case may be, we note that apart from placing reliance on the statements, the revenue authorities have also referred to the report of the investigation Wing which carried out search and survey in some other cases prior to the conclusion of assessment proceedings in the instant appeals and such investigation included

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

capital loss /long- term capital gains as the case may be, we note that apart from placing reliance on the statements, the revenue authorities have also referred to the report of the investigation Wing which carried out search and survey in some other cases prior to the conclusion of assessment proceedings in the instant appeals and such investigation included

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

capital loss /long- term capital gains as the case may be, we note that apart from placing reliance on the statements, the revenue authorities have also referred to the report of the investigation Wing which carried out search and survey in some other cases prior to the conclusion of assessment proceedings in the instant appeals and such investigation included

ACHHELAL YADAV,DANKUNI vs. ITO, WARD-23(1),HOOGHLY. , HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 844/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Achhelal Yadav Income Tax Officer, Ward- 23(1), G/4/3, Phase-Ii, Dankuni Housing Vs Hooghly Complex P.O. Dankuni West Bengal - 712331 [Pan: Aakpy3403B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, A/R Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/10/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 17/07/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Ao Passed U/S 154 When In Fact The Entire Sold Lands Were Rural Agriculture Lands & Thus The Said Lands Do Not Come Under The Purview Of The Definition Of Capital Asset As Provided Under Section 2(14)(Iii) & Thus The Entire Calculation Of Capital Gain On Sale Of Rural Agriculture Land Was Illegal, Wrong & Without Any Sanction Of Law. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ao By Invoking The Provision Of Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act Since The Mistake, Which Was Sought To Be Rectified By The Ao, Was Not A Mistake Apparent From The Record As Prescribed Under Section 154. 2

Section 54F of the Act cannot be applied because the same pertains to capital gain on transfer of certain capital assets not to be charged in case of investment in residential house. During the course of proceedings u/s 154 of the Act, assessee gave detailed reply firstly contending that agricultural land in question is not a capital asset and, therefore

NIKUNJ DHANUKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 32, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

160/- declared in the original return for Assessment Year 2012-13 furnished on 09/10/2012. The income declared in the original return includes short term capital gain from sale of shares at Rs. 57,46,787/- and exempt income u/s 10(38) of the Act at Rs.41,98,896/-. The return was processed u/s 143(3) of the Act and subsequently

ANJU DARUKA,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1),, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

160 taxmann.com\n652/465 ITR 356 (Delhi) while dealing with an identical challenge of approval, having\nbeen accorded mechanically, had held as under:-\n\"13. The primary grievance raised in the instant appeal relates to the manner of\nrecording the approval granted by the prescribed authority under Section 151 of the\nAct for reopening of assessment proceedings as per Section

DIVYA DUGAR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Itat Through The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

160/- 8,58,000/- 53,754 (LTCG) Share/MF 277,99,562/- 16,25,425/- 2,61,74,137/- [exempted u/s 10(38) LTCG Share 95,932/- 84,622/- 11,310/- (STCG) 65,074/- 5. For that the charging interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C are mechanically wrong and illegal. 6. For that the appellant reserves the right to adduce

HIRAK SARKAR,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIR. 23(1), HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld Cit(Appeals) As His Mother Was Not Well Because Of Prolonged Disease Was Going Under Medical Supervision And

capital gain of Rs. 40,162/-. The reported sale value of the property was Rs. 2,75,000/- and the indexed cost of acquisition was Rs. 2,34,838/-. According to details from the AR and the ITS database, the property was registered at a market value of Rs. 1,40,000/-, as confirmed by the registration deed dated

BIJNI DOOARS TEA COMPANY LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOL-2, KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Bijni Dooars Tea Company Principal Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kolkata-2, 4Th Floor, Room No. 1, Kolkata. Vs. Shantiniketan, 8, Camac Street, Kolkata-700017. (Pan: Aabcb1013E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

gain on sale of investments was correctly reflected in the audited balance sheet at Rs.78,48,519/-. There was no mala fide intention of the assessee and it is a case of inadvertent mistake. 6.1. It was further submitted that there will be no additional tax liability due to the said error as mentioned above since the assessee was liable

PRADYUMNA DALMIA BENEFICIARY TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ADIT(CPC)/I.T.O., WARD - 33(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

160 are liable as representative assessees or any part thereof is not specifically receivable on behalf or for the benefit of any one person or I.T.A. No.: 1613/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Pradyumna Dalmia Beneficiary Trust. where the individual shares of the persons on whose behalf or for whose benefit such income or such part thereof is receivable are indeterminate

M/S COAL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA

160 Taxman 48/289\nITR 6 (SC), wherein it is held that investments made by a banking concern\nare part of the business or banking. Therefore, the income arising from such\ninvestments is attributable to business of banking falling under the head\n'profits and gains of business and profession'. On that basis, the circular\ncontains the decision of the Board

DEBASISH BANERJEE,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 44(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2018-19 Debasish Banerjee…………….……………………….……….……….……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, 1, Gibson Lane, Kol- 700069.. [Pan: Agfpb3602C] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(1), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manas Mondal, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.04.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Arising Out Of An Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] Dated 30.04.2021 By Ito, Ward-44(1), Kolkata.

capital gains”. The had purchased two properties i.e. 944 sq. ft and 400 sq. ft at 71A, Shyampukur Street, Kol-4 and the date of conveyance of the said properties on 22.12.2017 and 11.08.2017. The Assessing Officer observed that both the properties during the year amounted were above 46 lakhs and whereas the stamp duty value of the both

ACIT, CIR.-29,, KOLKATA vs. M/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CR. SOCIETY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma] I.T.A. No. 268/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Acit, Circle-29, Kolkata Vs. M/S. Steel Authority Of India Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Limited Pan: Aadas 9699 B Appellant Respondent Date Of Hearing 15.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.08.2023 For The Assessee Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Mrs. Puja Somani, Ca For The Revenue Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Order Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 20.12.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

capital gain from investments for AY 2011-12 which was reversed by the Ld. CIT(A) and held it as business income which action of the Ld. CIT(A) has not been challenged by the AO, so the finding of Ld CIT(A) that assessee is a trader of of shares and mutual funds crystallises. Therefore, applying the principle

SANGEETA DEVI ANCHALIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-32(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Ito Sangeeta Devi Anchalia 2, Gariahat Road (South) 31-C, Jhowtalla Road, Park Aaykar Bhavan Dakshin, Cicus, Kolkata-700017, Vs. Kolkata-700068, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Addpa0199C Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.01.2025

160/-. Sangeeta Devi Anchalia; A.Y. 2013-14 Thereafter, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act, after obtaining the approval from the competent authority and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued accordingly after recording reasons to believe u/s 148(2) of the Act. According to the ld. AO assessee did not comply with

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

gain, etc. Accordingly, the assessee was called upon to furnish the details which were furnished by the assessee by submitting that the ITA Nos.1728 & 1729/KOL/2024 Dollar Holding Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 15-16 and 17-18 amalgamating company as on the date of merger had investments amounting to ₹93,01,00,000/- which was acquired by the assessee company pursuant

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

gain, etc. Accordingly, the assessee was called upon to furnish the details which were furnished by the assessee by submitting that the ITA Nos.1728 & 1729/KOL/2024 Dollar Holding Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 15-16 and 17-18 amalgamating company as on the date of merger had investments amounting to ₹93,01,00,000/- which was acquired by the assessee company pursuant

AMBIKA TRADELINK PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T, CIR- 4(2), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar

160/-. Assessment u/s 153A/143(3) was completed on 28.12.2016 as per return. Page 4 of 13 I.T.A. No.: 916/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Ambika Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. An Information was received from ITO (Inv), Unit-1, Kolkata on 04/08.03.2019 in respect of M/s Ajay Trading Company wherein it has been stated that "Rahul Enterprise is a sole proprietorship maintaining account