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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain of Rs. 26,77,72,881/- and invested the same in constructing a new residential property. The Assessing Officer (AO) denied the exemption under Section

RAMAUTAR SARAF (HUF),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 59(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

72,500\n2,60,10,000\n5,46,52,500\n4.1. The Id. AO further noted that the assessee made payment of\n₹2,80,70,000/- to Bangalore NRI Complex Ltd. (Urbana Township) for\npurchase of land for construction of residential house at 783,\nAnandapur, Kolkata-700107 which was claimed by the assessee as\ninvestment for construction of residential

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

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

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

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

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

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

section 54F(1)\nwhich says that \"net consideration\", in relation to the transfer of a capital\nasset, means the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a\nresult of the transfer of the capital asset as reduced by any expenditure\nincurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer.\nIn CIT vs. Miss Piroja C. Patel

RAJIB CHAKRABORTY,KOLKATA vs. ITO- WARD-30(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 54F can not be denied on the ground that the 10 I.T.A. No.1279/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Rajib Chakraborty. assessee has not deposited the long term capital gain in the specified bank account because the assessee has invested the amount of capital gain for construction of house in the residential property as stated hereinabove nonetheless not depositing the amount

VENERABLE ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT,KOL-1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.459/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Venerable Advertising Pvt. Ltd....................…...……………....Appellant 6, Kali Krishna Tagore Street, Jorbagan, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aaacv8673M] Vs. Pcit, Kolkata-1, Kolkata…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Aayush Kedia, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Datta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 30, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 16, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 14.03.2023 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pcit’] U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Vide Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration I.E. A.Y 2018-19 Declared Total Income Of Rs.1,09,24,210/- Which Was Accepted By The Assessing Officer In The Assessment Carried Out U/S 143(3) Of The Act. However, Later On, The Ld. Pr. Cit In Exercising Of His Revision

72" of the paper book. The ld. Pr. CIT-1, Kolkata then issued a revised show-cause notice on 03.02.2023 requiring the assessee to submit complete details regarding long-term capital gain, short-term capital loss and dividend income by way of a questionnaire. The assessee submitted its reply wherein, the assessee submitted all the information/documents as required

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

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

capital gain and income from other sources, the ld. Assessing Officer gave the set off of unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.7,44,245/-. This working of the ld. Assessing Officer contains the mistakes as they are not in consonance with the provision of section 72

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

gains u/s 50D of the Act and assessed the total income at ₹16,61,52,180/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who, vide order dated 27.06.2025, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. ITA No.: 1784/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Madhur Coal Mining Pvt. Ltd. 4. Aggrieved with the order

MANICK CHANDRA PAUL,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2014-15

72 or sub- section (2) of section 73 or sub-section (2) of section 73A or sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) of section 74 or sub-section (3) of section 74A. In view of the above, the Ld. CIT(A) had no reasons to interfere with the observations of the Ld. AO and he dismissed the grounds

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

section 71 of the Act has a direct bearing on this issue and the same reads as under:- “72. (1) Where in respect of any assessment year the net result of the computation under any head of income, other than "CapitaI gains”, is a loss and the assessee has no income under the head "Capital

METROPOLITAN COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(2), KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

72,327/- was added as Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on sale of land. Further, an amount of Rs. 4,09,900/- was added as lease rent and finally an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- was added u/s 14A of the Act. 2 Metropolitan Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 1.2 Aggrieved with this action of Ld. AO, the assessee approached

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 461/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Britannia Industries Ltd. Dy. Cit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata 5/1A, Hungerford Street Vs Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata - 700017 [Pan: Aabcb2066P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kush Kanodia, A/R Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/10/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned 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. 24/03/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Appellant Had Suo Moto Computed & Disallowed Sum Of Rs.14,10,610/- Which Inter Alia Included Sum Of Rs.14,19,009/- Computed In Terms Of Rule 8D(2)(Ii) Being 1% Of The Value Of Tax Free Investments & Therefore The Ao Had Factually Erred In Holding That The Aforesaid Voluntary Disallowance Represented Disallowance Offered By Way Of Direct Expenditure U/S 14A Read With Rule 8D(2)(I) & Thereby Wrongly Computed Further Disallowance Of Rs.13,32,000/- In Terms Of Rule 8D(2)(Ii).

72,16,908 - 26,44,66,605]. These grounds are therefore partly allowed. 11. Ground No. 6 of the appeal relates to computation of short term capital on sale of listed investments following FIFO Method. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that, the appellant had computed and offered short term capital gain on sale of listed investments held

BRAJESH NARNOLIA,JHARKHAND vs. ITO,WD-1(1), ASANSOL. , ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 799/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Brajesh Narnolia,…………………………..........Appellant 419, City Center, Luby Circular Road, Dhanbad-826001, Jhankhand [Pan: Aczpn0347G] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-1(1), Asansol, Aayakar Bhawan, Room No. 3, Ground Floor, 116, Vivekananda Sarani, Kanyapur, Asansol-713341, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri S.S. Gupta, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 15, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 17, 2024 O R D E R

72,080/- and claimed long-term capital gain as exempt under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act. The ld. Assessing

NIRMAL SANTRA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 44(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 50C of the Act. We notice that the assessee is an individual and filed ITR Form No. 3 on 01.11.2019. In the column of computation of capital gain appearing in the ITR Form No. 3, the assessee has disclosed the transaction of long term capital gain. In the said detail which is appearing in the back side of page