DCIT, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

583 47,813 10,60,975 Net interest 9,390 12,997 39,530 32,621 Dividend 61,774 63,824 59,029 1,3,683 3. The Ld. ARs of the appellant also furnished copies of the assessment orders for the earlier years in support of the contention that even though in the earlier years ITA No.1390-1392/Kol/2017 A.Ys

DCIT, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

583 47,813 10,60,975 Net interest 9,390 12,997 39,530 32,621 Dividend 61,774 63,824 59,029 1,3,683 3. The Ld. ARs of the appellant also furnished copies of the assessment orders for the earlier years in support of the contention that even though in the earlier years ITA No.1390-1392/Kol/2017 A.Ys

DCIT, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

583 47,813 10,60,975 Net interest 9,390 12,997 39,530 32,621 Dividend 61,774 63,824 59,029 1,3,683 3. The Ld. ARs of the appellant also furnished copies of the assessment orders for the earlier years in support of the contention that even though in the earlier years ITA No.1390-1392/Kol/2017 A.Ys

DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S JET AGE SECURITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1359/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Jet Age Securities Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcj 0993 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 18.03.2014 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The first issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in directing the ld AO to treat the profits from sale of shares to be taxed as short term capital

AMAR DAS,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD 1(3),DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Amar Das -Vs- Ito, Ward-1(3), Durgapur [Pan: Aihpd 2414 L ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

583 Net Profit from trading of land Rs.7,99,072/- Gross total income of the assessee Rs.7,99,072/- Less: Deduction under Chapter VIA Rs.1,00,000/- Taxable Income Rs.6,99,072/- The assessee was in receipt of advance against the sale of land from the following parties: Shri Moloy Ghosh Rs. 2,00,000/- Shri Aakash Construction

RUSSELL CREDIT LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T (OSD),CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue as well as assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

583/-. According to AO, in the return of income assessee claimed long term capital loss amounting to Rs.4,84,27,143/-. When asked to give details of assets for which the said loss was computed and the computation thereof the assessee in response, filed the details along with explanatory notes. The AO noted that out of the said loss, long

D.C.I.T CIR - 8,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S RUSSEL CREDIT LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue as well as assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

583/-. According to AO, in the return of income assessee claimed long term capital loss amounting to Rs.4,84,27,143/-. When asked to give details of assets for which the said loss was computed and the computation thereof the assessee in response, filed the details along with explanatory notes. The AO noted that out of the said loss, long

P.L. GOENKA HUF,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 29/4, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

4 4.1. On the other hand, the ld. D/R vehemently argued supporting the order of both the lower authorities. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. Before proceeding to examine the reasons recorded, we would first like to go through the standard operating procedure of recording satisfaction for reopening assessment

ITO, WARD - 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CFL CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., KOLKATA

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

gains but made an addition under section 28(iv). Aggrieved both the parties are in appeal. 4. We have heard Md. Usman, Ld. CIT DR on behalf of the revenue. The learned departmental representative submitted that the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in giving to a conclusion at para 6.3 of his order that, the assessee is covered

CFL CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

gains but made an addition under section 28(iv). Aggrieved both the parties are in appeal. 4. We have heard Md. Usman, Ld. CIT DR on behalf of the revenue. The learned departmental representative submitted that the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in giving to a conclusion at para 6.3 of his order that, the assessee is covered

SINGHANIA & SONS (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 10(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Singhania & Sons Pvt. Ltd…………...............................................................………………….............Appellant 3D, Duckback House 41, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aadcs 6078 A] Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Nfac...............................................………..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Katarua, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

capital gains of Rs.39,919/- was claimed to be exempt by the assessee and a disallowance of Rs.42,110/- was offered u/s 14A of the Act on account of direct expenses incurred in relation to the said exempt income on account of D-MAT charges. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that direct expenses

V.N.G.MERCANTILE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 5(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Him. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ld.Ao. 4. For That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Disallowing Entire Administrative Expense Amounting To Rs.2,99,255/- While Passing The Assessment Order. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ld.Ao. 5. For That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Delete All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal At The Time Of Hearing.

Gain in the same year. Thus, the loss being a capital loss cannot be allowed to be debited to the Profit and Loss account of the assessee, and, accordingly, the amount of Rs.359785.50 is added back to the total income of the assessee. “ 7. Before the CIT-A the assessee contended that the investment and sale was done

JAI PRAKASH GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-37(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

capital gains by way of accommodation entry and subsequently claimed it as exempt income u/s 10(38) of the Act. Since the transactions carried out by the assessee is a bogus one, the amount of income that has escaped assessment in the instant case is Rs. 5,55,624/- and in view of the above, I have substantial reasons

EMERALD FAMILY TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGLURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

capital gain. During the year, the assessee earned dividend income of Rs. 7,05,84,022/- after claiming deduction of Rs. 10,00,000/- u/s 115BBDA of the Act and remaining dividend after claiming exemption of Rs. 10,00,000/- of Rs. 6,95,84,022/- was offered to tax. While processing return of income CPC-Bangalore treated the said

ITO,WARD-41(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SUBRATA SAHA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ]

capital gains earned from the redemption of mutual funds for Rs.8,51,641/-. The appellant having explained the source of investment in mutual funds, I therefore hold that the addition of Rs.78,60,000/- on account of investment in mutual fund was not justified and therefore the addition of Rs.78,60,000/- on account of investment in mutual fund

M/S. LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the Asst Year 2013-14 in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 927 & 2400/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14

583/- 5.5. Later the assessee filed a rectification petition u/s 154 of the Act on 23.12.2016 against the giving effect order dated 24.11.2016 pointing out various mistakes apparent from record as under:- a) Adoption of incorrect margin of Lucid Software Ltd at 14.90% instead of corrected working capital adjusted NCP margin of 12.04% b) Adoption of incorrect margin of Spry

M/S. LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR- 2(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the Asst Year 2013-14 in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 927 & 2400/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14

583/- 5.5. Later the assessee filed a rectification petition u/s 154 of the Act on 23.12.2016 against the giving effect order dated 24.11.2016 pointing out various mistakes apparent from record as under:- a) Adoption of incorrect margin of Lucid Software Ltd at 14.90% instead of corrected working capital adjusted NCP margin of 12.04% b) Adoption of incorrect margin of Spry

M/S MERLIN RESOURCES PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1239/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09)

gain and indexation was to be allowed, without having regard to the fact that the genuineness of transactions and antecedents of that company was not established in course of assessment proceedings or before the ld. CIT(A) to be genuine transactions.” M/s Merlin Resources Ltd. ITA No.1239/Kol/2013 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 4. Now, we shall take up assessee`s appeal