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

SAROJ GOENKA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 30(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

64,511/- resulting in long term capital\ngain of Rs.26,77,72,881/-. The assessee claimed that, she had\nspent Rs.53,86,80,198/- upto 31.03.2021 towards construction of\nher new residential property at 1 Queens Park, whose completion\ncertificate was received on 09.06.2022 i.e. within three years from\nthe date of long-term capital gain and therefore the entire

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

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

gain for purchase of new asset within stipulated time u/s 139(4) of\nthe Act.\nThe Hon'ble Guwahati High Court had further held that section 54 of the I.T.\nAct, 1961 is a beneficial provision for the assessee in the matter relating\nwith the sale of long term capital assets, it appears, for the constitutional\ngoal of providing residence

NAMOKAR BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am]

64,390/-. The assessee is engaged in the business of sales and purchase of shares/securities. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny as per the CBDT guidelines following a survey u/s. 133A of the Act conducted on the assessee. Statutory notices were duly issued and served upon the assessee. It is pertinent to state that the return

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

64 taxmann.com 214 (Calcutta) etc. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing application of provisions of section 80IA(10) of the Act, despite having common expenses pertaining to normal income and income eligible for deduction u/s 801A of the Act. 5. That on the facts

BIMLA DEVI AGRAWAL,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T./D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 153 of the Act, is void and bad-in-law". 2. FOR that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) was wrong and unjustified in not discussing/considering the submission made before him in respect of violation of limitation by the Ld. A.O. in passing the assessment order on 06.04.2021 which was to be passed by 31.12.2019. 3. FOR that

GOUTAM GHOSH,HOWRAH vs. P.C.I.T., KOLKATA - 13, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

gains shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which such transfer takes place and the provisions of this Act, other than the provisions of this sub-section, shall apply for the purpose of determination of full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. Explanation : For the purposes of this

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

gains (which in this\ncase are shares). We do not know which shares have been transacted and with whom\nhas the transaction taken place. There are absolutely no details available and the\ninformation supplied is extremely scanty and vague. In so far as the basis for the\nreasons is concerned, even this is absent. The Assessing Officer did not verify

ANIL KUMAR PAIK,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 468/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Anil Kumar Paik Acit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates Vs 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor Suite No. 203 Off Hare Street Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aflpp6567R] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present 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. 15/03/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

64,832/- - Rs.1,46,07,923/-). 2.6. From the profit & loss account it is noticed that the prior period expenses like KMC Plan Sanction fees for Rs.7,12,767/-, architect fees paid for Rs.1,00,000/- are claimed in the current previous year, i.e. 2015-16. It can safely derived from such booking of prior period expenses that the assessee

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

section 50D of the Act and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of capital gains arising from the transfer of shares of the group companies to the related parties. The Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue as under: “8.6 Grounds of Appeal No. 2: 8.6.1 Vide above ground of appeal, the appellant has challenged the addition

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MEENAKSHI MERCANTILES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Circle-11(1), Meenakshi Mercantiles Limited Kolkata Room No 504, Woodburn Aayakar Bhawan, 6Thfloor, P-7, Central, 5A,Bibhabati Bose, Vs. Chowringhee Square, Kolkata, Sarani Kolkata, West Bengal, 700069 Westbengal-700020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm1113E Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Smt. Lata Goyal, Ars Revenue By : Shri Sailen Samadder, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.04.2025

capital gain and income did not include any business income or operational income and therefore, the ld. AO concluded that there was no business activity, yet the assessee company debited an expense of Rs. 1,76,64,882 out of which the interest paid is Rs. 1,74,12,682 and accordingly, disallowed the interest on the ground that

PRAHLAD DUTT LATA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-35(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 265/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Prahlad Dutt Lata Income Tax Officer, Ward – Vs 35(1), Kolkata Urvashi Apartment 3, Hunger Ford Street Kolkata - 700017 [Pan : Aaxpl1559J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 13/08/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 86 Days In Filing Of This Appeal. There Is A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With An Affidavit & The Reason For The Said Delay Is Mainly On Account Of Old Age Of The Assessee & The Delay On The Part Of The Person Who Received The Envelope Sent From The Office Of The Ld. Cit(A) Which Was Required To Be Handed Over To The Assessee. On Perusal Of The Affidavit, We Are Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented For Reasonable Cause

Capital Gains amounting to Rs.31,64,785/- and instead sustaining an addition of Rs. 33 Lakhs being the gross sale proceeds of shares ignoring the facts and evidences produced by the appellant before the A.O. 3. That the order passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) sustaining disallowance of payment of Interest paid amounting to Rs.3,01,034 claimed

SHRI GAUTAM SETT,HOOGHLY vs. P.C.I.T.-8, KOLKATA NOW P.C.I.T.-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

gain to this extent has been under assessed and accordingly assessment framed is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Ld. A.R pointed out that the assessee has computed long term capital loss at Rs. 1,64,86,480/- by taking actual sale consideration of Rs. 80,00,000/- and indexed cost of land

M/S. NKA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD. (SUCCESSOR OF M/S. NK ENTERPRISES (P) LTD,SINCE AMALGAMATED),KOLKATA vs. ITO,WD-3(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1106/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 M/S. Nka Commercialprivate Limited,.........Appellant (Successor Of M/S. Nk Enterprises (P) Ltd. Since Amalgamated) Unit 1304, Plot No. Ai-4, Ergo Building, Ep/Gp Block, Sector-V, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700091 [Pan: Aaccn3159Q] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-3(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 4Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Ankit Jalan, 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

section 2(47)(v) of the Act as only construction was allowed to be done by the builders after obtaining necessary approvals from competent authorities and, therefore, the capital gain has wrongly been computed and 3 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 M/s.NKA Commercial Private Limited charged to tax. The ld. A.R. relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High

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)

sections 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act dated 19.02.2021 for AY 2018-19. 2. Assessee has raised four grounds of appeal, all of which relate to assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. Pr. CIT for invoking the revisionary proceeding u/s. 263 of the Act and 2 Bijni Dooars Tea Co. Ltd., AY 2018-19 passing the impugned order thereon