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]

71 and 74. We observe from the perusal of section 2(14) of the Act that shares/securities are treated as capital asset and no exception has been provided in section 2(14) as has been provided in (i) to (vi) to the said section. Further the gain

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

gains under section 48 of the Act. Sub-clause (i) of that Section states that expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the transfer of capital asset has to be deducted from full value consideration received or accruing. Preamble of the Conveyance Deed executed by the assessee along with Shri Nita Basu reads as under :— 'THIS INDENTURE made this

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

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

71,982/- incurred by the appellant in connection with the transfer of\nhis capital asset, if not as improvement cost of the capital asset, in view of\nCBDT circular No. 14(XL) 35 of 1955, dated 11.4.1955.\n8. For that on the facts and circumstances & legal position of the case, the\nLd. CIT (A) ought not to have confirmed

MADHUR COAL MINING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

2 of the appeal are dismissed. 10. Ground nos. 3 & 4 relate to addition of ₹5,24,71,800/- made by the Ld. AO by applying the provisions of section 50D of the Act and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of capital gains

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

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

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

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

GAURAV VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

2,03,68,000/- as Short term Capital Gains by invoking the provisions of section 50D of the Act and assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹15,11,71

PADMALOCHANAN RADHAKRISHNAN,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 62, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 130/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-2015

2), (2A) & (3) of Section 71 of the Act, we notice that ‘Loss under the head Business & Profession’ as well as ‘Capital Gain

MINAKSHI DAS,JALPAIGURI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(3),, SILIGURI

section 148A of the Act\nproceeding was ₹2,19,00,000/- which was three times of the actual\nsum. It was also submitted by the assessee that ₹19,75,000/-\ndeposited in BOB was out of sale proceeds of ornaments. Similarly,\n19,71,000/- was deposited in PNB account were from sale proceeds\nof gold ornaments. However

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

sections 164 r.w.s. 167B of the Act were applicable and the surcharge of 15% on the capital gains was applicable and on the balance 10% surcharge was liable to be imposed. However, the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) applied surcharge of 37%. During the course of appeal before us, the assessee relied upon the cases of Tribunal as mentioned in para

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7(1) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

71,62,790/- declared in the return for Assessment Year 2013-14 filed on 29/11/2014. Case selected for scrutiny through CASS and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has entered into certain international and specific domestic transactions and Form No. 3CEB has been submitted. The case was referred

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

71,380/- under the head Begraj Agarwal & Ors Huf; A.Y. 2013-14 income from other sources, after claiming deduction under Chapter VIA amounting to ₹1,04,768/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter the ld. AO received the information from Pr. DIT (Investigation), Kolkata, vide letter dated 27.04.2015, that assessee had taken accommodation entries from

ORIENTAL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

section 143(3) of the Act passed by A.C.I.T Circle (l), Exemption, Kolkata . 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata has erred coming to conclusion that utilisation of corpus fund of Rs.8,71,03,846/- represent claim of application of income, when the aforesaid 2 Oriental Charitable foundation

M/S. MILLENNIUM STOCK BROKING (P) LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

71, so much of the loss as has not been so set off or, 3 ] where he has no income under any other head, the whole loss shall, subject to the other provisions of this Chapter, be carried forward to the following assessment year, and- 5 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 M/s. Millennium Stock Broking (P) Limited (i) it shall

JALUIDANGA PASCHIM NASARATPUR SAMABY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LIMITED,BARDHAMAN, WEST BENGAL vs. INCOME TAX OPPFICER, WARD-1(3), BURDWAN

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

gains of such activities entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Income Tax Act 1961. our appellant society entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the whole of the interest /Dividend received from other Cooperative Societies. Your appellant society entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(c) of the Income

THE BANK OF TOKYO-MITSUBISHI LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ADIT, INT. TAX., KOLKATA

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

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

gains of such activities entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Income Tax Act 1961. our appellant society entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the whole of the interest /Dividend received from other Cooperative Societies. Your appellant society entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(c) of the Income