DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRAPHITE INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, considering the discussions made above, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

gains, as the assessee was enjoying the property for more than 36 months. 15. In the case of CIT v. Ved Prakash Rakhra [2012] 26 taxmann.com 166/210 Taxman 605 (Kar.), the Court took note of the decision in the case of V.V. Mody (supra) and after noting that the said decision refers to the insertion of sub-Clause

DINESH GANGWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-50(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1105/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Dinesh Gangwal,.....................................Appellant Olympus Court, Flat 102, Block-B, 4/2, Sarat Bose Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Adxpg0498E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-50(1), Kolkata, Income Tax Office, Manicktala, Civil Centre, Uttarapan Complex Ds-Iv, Kolkata-700067 Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Amitava Sen, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 26, 2023 O R D E R

164/-. The asseske has not shown any Long Term Capital Gain. On examination of details of report, it has found that {here has not been any real transaction in respect of penny stock and everything was created artificially in order to give profit / bogus Long Term Capital Gain to the assessee for consideration of money paid by the assessee

SWATI SARAWAGI FAMILY TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

capital gains, therefore, even otherwise the surcharge was to be limited to 15%. Since the beneficiaries are known and the shares are mentioned in the trust deed, therefore, the provisions of section 167B or section 164

SWATI SARAWAGI FAMILY TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

capital gains, therefore, even otherwise the surcharge was to be limited to 15%. Since the beneficiaries are known and the shares are mentioned in the trust deed, therefore, the provisions of section 167B or section 164

ASHIKA STOCK BROKING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

gain in lieu of brokerage commission. We have also perused reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act by the AO to reopen the assessment on the basis of DDIT Kolkata report and find that the reasons were recorded very vague manner, are full of infirmities and non application of mind. We note that the AO has recorded

ASHIKA STOCK BROKING LIMITED, KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

gain in lieu of brokerage commission. We have also perused reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act by the AO to reopen the assessment on the basis of DDIT Kolkata report and find that the reasons were recorded very vague manner, are full of infirmities and non application of mind. We note that the AO has recorded

ASHIKA STOCK BROKING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

gain in lieu of brokerage commission. We have also perused reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act by the AO to reopen the assessment on the basis of DDIT Kolkata report and find that the reasons were recorded very vague manner, are full of infirmities and non application of mind. We note that the AO has recorded

ASHIKA STOCK BROKING LIMITED, KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

gain in lieu of brokerage commission. We have also perused reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act by the AO to reopen the assessment on the basis of DDIT Kolkata report and find that the reasons were recorded very vague manner, are full of infirmities and non application of mind. We note that the AO has recorded

SREELEATHERS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain and not all overhead\nexpenses/common expenses are allowable in the said head. He\nfurther pleaded that income from investment (even debt mutual\nfund) is exempt in nature and where there is no exempt income\nearned, there cannot be any disallowance under section 14A. The\nld. Counsel heavily relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Calcutta\nHigh Court

THE DCIT, CIR-3(2) GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED , GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

gains of business” in section 80P (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, emphasise that the income in respect of which deduction is sought by a cooperative society must constitute the operational income and not the other income which accrues to Page 18 of 45 I.T.A. Nos.: 1582 & 1583/KOL/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Sikkim State Cooperative Supply

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR-3(2), GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED, GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

gains of business” in section 80P (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, emphasise that the income in respect of which deduction is sought by a cooperative society must constitute the operational income and not the other income which accrues to Page 18 of 45 I.T.A. Nos.: 1582 & 1583/KOL/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Sikkim State Cooperative Supply

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. GOLDEN GOENKA CREDIT PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

capital gain/loss…”. The Assessee has made detailed submissions to disregard the evidentiary value of such shell company list prepared by the Investigation Wing. The Assessee Company stated that declaring a company as a shell company is a virtual condemnation and that too without a hearing. In the assessment order, the AO has alleged that the lender companies involved

AIROVIENT FANS & SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

capital gain’. At the assessment stage, a disallowance of Rs. 2,59,97,824/- was made u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act') on the finding that the assessee had failed to submit documentary evidences to confirm the genuineness of expenditure booked. It is recorded by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred

SUNDEEP SETHI,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 44(2),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1248/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sundeep Sethi…….……………………………...………………..….……….Appellant 164, M. G. Road, Burra Bazar, Kol-7. [Pan: Alaps7114C] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata ………..........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sima Das Biswas, Jcit-Sr.Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 11, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 20.03.2024 For The Assessment Year 2015–16. 2. At The Outset The Ld. Ar Stated That There Is A Delay Of 374 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Citing Reasonable Cause For The Belated Filing. We After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause In Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time. Accordingly, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication On Merits. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2015–16 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.12,79,510/-. Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Was Issued To The Assessee For The Reasons That The Assessee In Ei Schedule Of The Said Return Has Claimed Exempt Income Under The Head ‘Long Term Capital Gains’ From Transaction On Which Securities Transaction Tax Is Paid. In

164, M. G. Road, Burra Bazar, Kol-7. [PAN: ALAPS7114C] vs. ITO, Ward-44(2), Kolkata ………..........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sima Das Biswas, JCIT-Sr.DR, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : August 11, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : August 11, 2025 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

164 taxmann.com 764 (Gujarat).\n6. 2. 20. I find that the facts of the instant case at hand is quite similar to\nthe facts discussed by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of\nPrincipal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Sree leathers in [2022] 143\ntaxmann.com 435 (Calcutta). The facts of the said case were:\na) The assessee

UNIVERSAL TRADING COMPANY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 5(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

capital of the company.] 8. On perusal of the above, it shall be noted that, u/s 115O(1) of the Act, an assessee company is required to pay additional income tax on the dividends distributed or paid by the company. Sub-section (1A) further provides that, the amount on which such additional income tax is payable shall be reduced

BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT CIR.-6(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

gains of such eligible business shall be computed as if the transfer has been made at Arm’s Length Price (in short, the ‘ALP’). The profits of the eligible undertaking should be ordinary, having regard to ALP. To discover the ALP as mandated in Section 80IA of the Act, the assessee was show-caused as to why the same price

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

gains of such eligible business shall be computed as if the transfer has been made at Arm’s Length Price (in short, the ‘ALP’). The profits of the eligible undertaking should be ordinary, having regard to ALP. To discover the ALP as mandated in Section 80IA of the Act, the assessee was show-caused as to why the same price