SMT SARBANI GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-49, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of both the assessee’s are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 251(2) of the Act specifically provides that the Appellate Commissioner shall not enhance an assessment unless the appellant before him is given reasonable opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement. On perusal of the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), we find that there is no mention in the order that any such opportunity of being

THE UNITED PROVINCES SUGAR COMPANY LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

gains, taxable u/s 45 of the Act and realisation of capital due to improvement of capital asset by way of external realisation of capital due to improvement of capital asset by way of external realisation of capital due to improvement of capital asset by way of external development over a long period of time. r a long period of time

STEWARTS & LLOYDS OF INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOL - I, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2004-05 Stewarts & Lloyds Of India Ltd. -Versus- C.I.T., Circle-1, Kolkata Kolkata (Pan:Aaecs 0445G) (Appellant ) (Respondent)

251,074 Less :- Indexed cost of acquisition (Note 1) 34,419,420 Long-term Capital Gain/(Loss) (3,168,346) Note-1 Indexed cost of acquisition is determined as under :- Estimated Fair market value of Land as on 01-04-1981 (Year of acquisition – 1971) [As per valuation report attached] 7,434,000 Indexed cost of acquisition

M/S. LEND LEASE COMPANY (INDIA) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 526/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2005-06

capital gain and application of provision of section 14A of the Act. It was his submission that since the scope of the assessment proceedings pursuant to order u/s 263 of the Act are limited to the specific issues dealt with in the order u/s 363 of the Act, the CIT(A) cannot in exercise of his powers of enhancement

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 47(v) Rs. 5,45,100/- (ii) Cost u/s 55(2)(b)(b)(ii) as on 01.04.1981 as per Rs. 1,35,38,000/- valuation report of Er. S K Bhagat, FIE(India) (iii) Conversion cost paid for making land & building Rs. 2,39,05,168/- freehold

JCT LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 47(v) Rs. 5,45,100/- (ii) Cost u/s 55(2)(b)(b)(ii) as on 01.04.1981 as per Rs. 1,35,38,000/- valuation report of Er. S K Bhagat, FIE(India) (iii) Conversion cost paid for making land & building Rs. 2,39,05,168/- freehold

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. SHRI SAROJ KUMAR PODDAR, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble]

Section 56(2)(vii) of the that the department has conceded the ground of taxability under Section 56(2)(vii) of the that the department has conceded the ground of taxability under Section 56(2)(vii) of the Act. 10.4. The ld. CIT D/R further submitted that the power

SHREE PADMASAGAR EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 5,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2008-09

251 scripts involving frequent transactions of purchase and sale of share. Besides the AO observed that the purchased value of shares and securities is at ₹ 6.85 crores and sale consideration of shares sold to ₹5.89 crores during the year. In many cases, the sale and purchase of share has taken place on same date but assessee has declared its income

I.T.O WD - 9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S VISHAL EQUITY SERVICES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S Viswanethra Ravi

capital gains under section 251 of the act in the circumstances of the case. 4. The brief facts of the case

ITO, WD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WHITE CLIFF PROPERTIES (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

251 read with section 251/154/143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27.12.2013 computing the capital gain for the A.Y 2006-07. 4. Aggrieved

SHRI SAROJ KUMAR PODDAR,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S.Godara, Jm] Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Saroj Kumar Poddar -Versus- D.C.I.T., Circle-6(1) Kolkata Kolkata (Pan: Aftpp 2386 N) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant: Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr.Counsel, Sri Ronak G.Doshi & Shri A.K.Gupta, Ar For The Respondent: Shri Girish Dave, Special Counsel & Shri P.K.Srihari, Cit Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 16.11.2018 Order Per J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-(A)-2, Kolkata Dated 10.07..2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act ‘) Relating To A.Y. 2014-15, Wherein The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘ Act’ ) Dated 30.12.2016 Was Confirmed.

capital gains”. After holding that the receipt in question is taxable under those heads, he ultimately held that the receipt is taxable under the head “income from other sources” for the reasons as given in his order. The law, in our view, does not place limitations as to the manner in which the AO proposed to tax particular receipt

WHITEPIN TIE-UP LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WD-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2011-12

capital gain becomes relevant while determining the profit under section 115JB of the Act. Therefore respectfully following the aforesaid order we are inclined to reverse the order of Authorities Below. Hence the ground of Appeal of the assessee is allowed. 14. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 14/06/2018 ("या

SRI HARI SADHAN KONER L/H SMT. BONDANA PROVA KONAR,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD - 1(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 50C of the Act by taking deemed sale consideration at Rs. 21,60,004/- in terms of stamp authority valuation and taking the fair market value at Rs. 21,000/-, the index cost was calculated at Rs. 1,42,200/-. Accordingly the long term capital gain was calculated at 2 AY: 2011-12 Sri Hari Sadhan Konar

SUNDEEP MUKHERJEE ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 22(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice -] I.T.A. No. 1271/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Sundeep Mukherjee.............................……………………………………………………………....Appellant Commerce House, 8Th Floor, Room 3A, 2, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkat -700 013. [Pan : Afcpm 5140 E] Ito Ward 22(3) Kolkata...................………………………………………………….............Respondent 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, Kolkata – 700 016. Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 14, 2018 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 6, Kolkata Dated 17.05.2018 Whereby He Upheld The Rectification Order Passed By The Ao U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is An Individual Who Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 15.07.2005 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 1,63,230/-. In The Assessment Completed Originally U/S 143(3) Vide An Order Dated 26.12.2007, The Total Income Of The Assessee Was Determined By The Ao At Rs. 10,84,370/- After Making Addition Inter Alia On Account Of Short Term Capital Gain Amounting To Rs. 6,97,716/- & Tax @ 10% Was Calculated On Such Short Term Capital Gain As Per Section 111A Of The Act. Against The Order Passed By The Ao U/S 143(3), An Appeal Was Filed By The Assessee Before The Ld. Cit(A) Who Disposed Of The Same

capital gain was added back and tax was computed on the entire STCG by application of section 111A and such application was applied in all subsequent orders. iv. That now suddenly when such addition has been partly reduced by the Ld. CIT(A), application of section 111A cannot be denied by a change of opinion of a complete assessment, that

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. LIKHAMI COMMERCIAL COMPANY LTD. AMALGAMATED INTO CHOICEST ENTERPRISES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 770/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-7, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 -Vs.- M/S.R.K.B.K. Fiscal Services Pvt. Limited,.Respondent [Now Known As Ambuja Neotia Holdings P. Ltd.] Block-4B, 3Rd Floor, Ecospace Business Park, Premises No.11F/11, Action Area-Ii, New Town, Kolkata-700160 [Pan:Aabcr5623E] & I.T.A. No. 771/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 -Vs.- Smt. Gayatri Neotia,…….……..……………..Respondent (Legal Heir Of Late Suresh Kumar Neotia) 7/2, Queen’S Park, Ballygunge, Kolkata-19 [Pan:Abkpn2315E] & I.T.A. No. 772/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 1

251/- 5. The ld. Assessing Officer after going through the submissions made by the assessee in this connection did not accept the claim made by the assessee for segregation of the sale price and allocating it @ Rs.30.80 per share towards managerial control. He assessed the whole consideration as a long-term capital gain. 6. Dissatisfied with the assessment order

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GOVIND COMMERCIAL CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 770/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-7, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 -Vs.- M/S.R.K.B.K. Fiscal Services Pvt. Limited,.Respondent [Now Known As Ambuja Neotia Holdings P. Ltd.] Block-4B, 3Rd Floor, Ecospace Business Park, Premises No.11F/11, Action Area-Ii, New Town, Kolkata-700160 [Pan:Aabcr5623E] & I.T.A. No. 771/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 -Vs.- Smt. Gayatri Neotia,…….……..……………..Respondent (Legal Heir Of Late Suresh Kumar Neotia) 7/2, Queen’S Park, Ballygunge, Kolkata-19 [Pan:Abkpn2315E] & I.T.A. No. 772/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 1

251/- 5. The ld. Assessing Officer after going through the submissions made by the assessee in this connection did not accept the claim made by the assessee for segregation of the sale price and allocating it @ Rs.30.80 per share towards managerial control. He assessed the whole consideration as a long-term capital gain. 6. Dissatisfied with the assessment order

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SMT. BIMALA DEVI PODDAR, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 770/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-7, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 -Vs.- M/S.R.K.B.K. Fiscal Services Pvt. Limited,.Respondent [Now Known As Ambuja Neotia Holdings P. Ltd.] Block-4B, 3Rd Floor, Ecospace Business Park, Premises No.11F/11, Action Area-Ii, New Town, Kolkata-700160 [Pan:Aabcr5623E] & I.T.A. No. 771/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 -Vs.- Smt. Gayatri Neotia,…….……..……………..Respondent (Legal Heir Of Late Suresh Kumar Neotia) 7/2, Queen’S Park, Ballygunge, Kolkata-19 [Pan:Abkpn2315E] & I.T.A. No. 772/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 1

251/- 5. The ld. Assessing Officer after going through the submissions made by the assessee in this connection did not accept the claim made by the assessee for segregation of the sale price and allocating it @ Rs.30.80 per share towards managerial control. He assessed the whole consideration as a long-term capital gain. 6. Dissatisfied with the assessment order

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. R.K.B.K. FISCAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. NOW KNOW AS AMBUJA NEOTIA HOLDINGS P LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 770/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-7, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 -Vs.- M/S.R.K.B.K. Fiscal Services Pvt. Limited,.Respondent [Now Known As Ambuja Neotia Holdings P. Ltd.] Block-4B, 3Rd Floor, Ecospace Business Park, Premises No.11F/11, Action Area-Ii, New Town, Kolkata-700160 [Pan:Aabcr5623E] & I.T.A. No. 771/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 -Vs.- Smt. Gayatri Neotia,…….……..……………..Respondent (Legal Heir Of Late Suresh Kumar Neotia) 7/2, Queen’S Park, Ballygunge, Kolkata-19 [Pan:Abkpn2315E] & I.T.A. No. 772/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 1

251/- 5. The ld. Assessing Officer after going through the submissions made by the assessee in this connection did not accept the claim made by the assessee for segregation of the sale price and allocating it @ Rs.30.80 per share towards managerial control. He assessed the whole consideration as a long-term capital gain. 6. Dissatisfied with the assessment order