SHREE GOVIND PROPERTY & INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Capital Gains of Rs. 28,80,542/ in its return of income under the head Profits and Gains of Business and Profession instead of the correct business ITA No.: 2166/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shree Govind Property & Investments Pvt. Ltd. income of Rs. 58,525/- and had duly filed a revised computation of income during the assessment proceedings and appellate

SRI NIRMALENDU NAG,PURBA MIDNAPORE vs. ITO WD. 27(2), HALDIA, HALDIA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the Ld Valuation Officer U/S 50C(2) of the IT Act, 961. 4 For that the Ld. CIT(A)NFAC failed to consider the order of Ld, CIT(A)NFAC in the matter of appellant's wife, Smt. Purnima Nag, who was the joint owner (50% share) of the said immoveable property sold to same purchaser jointly at a sale consideration of Rs.14,90,000/-

capital gains (A-B) 48,470/- 6. This order is passed u/s 144/250 of the Act after giving effect to the order of the CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, passed on 03.07.2023 u/s 250 of the Act in the assessee’s Appeal No. CIT(A), Kolkata – 7/10115/2018-19 for the A.Y. 2013-14. Tax payable is computed as per the computation sheet

SIDDHARTH PAHWA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-33(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

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

TDS [Rs.1,37,500 + Rs.1,12,500/-]. During the course of hearing of scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) the information was passed on to the Ld. AO by a letter dated 11.11.2017 and a request was made to re-compute the Long Term Capital Gain

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. TIRUPATI NIRYAT PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Am Dcit, Central Circle-1(1), O/O The Dcit, Central Circle 1(1) Tirupati Niryat Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata, Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, 145, Rash Behari Avenue, Vs. 110, Shantipally, Em By Pass Kolkata-700029, West Bengal Pin-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct4058P Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

Capital gains' is deleted. 4. Grounds of Appeal No.3 4.1 Assessee had made investments in shares. However, assessee had not disallowed any expenses u/s 14A of the IT Act. Hence, invoking circular no. 5/2014 of CBDT, AO has applied Rule 8D and computed disallowable amount u/s 14A at Rs. 75,186/- and added the same to the total income

SANJAY KUMAR SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

capital gain since there is no transfer of right is attached with the said agreement. This development agreement has been entered for construction of new building on a land with some temporary structure. In both the case your assessee would not be liable to pay any tax on the transaction reported any would only be liable to pay tax only

UTTAM DAS,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Gain or Short-Term Capital Loss is baseless and devoid of any application of mind. The only transaction that the assessee had in the scrip of Global Capital Markets Limited was that of purchase of 5,000 shares on 28.03.2011 and another 5000 shares on 29.03.2011. The same may be verified from the Contract Note issued by the broker - Motilal

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)

Capital Gains as per the normal provisions of the Act.. .. there was no malafide intention of the assessee company to make such a mistake." (page 22 of the Paper Book) First of all, the AR of the assessee admits that mistakes have been made. Secondly, he also admits that particulars of DOT are part and parcel of both

MUSHTAQUE AHMED,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-40(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

capital gain arising from compensation received from land acquisition by the Collector ,Distt Arwal for construction of Arwal Sahar approach road for acquiring non-agricultural land. The assessee received total compensation of Rs.91,62,720/- on which TDS

JYOTI JHA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT (IT), CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 225/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jyoti Jha Acit(It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata Kalani & Co. Chartered Accountants Vs 5Th Floor, Milestone Building Gandhinagar Turn Tonk Road Jaipur - 302015 [Pan : Aezpj7440J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Fca Revenue By : Shri Sunil Kr. Agarwala, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/08/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/10/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel – 2, New Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Drp”) Dt. 05/12/2022, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. The Ld. Ao Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Assessing The Income Under The Head Capital Gain At Rs.41,46,0917- As Against Nil Income Declared By The Assessee On The Basis Of Direction Of Drp Ignoring That The Amount Of Capital Gain Has Been Invested In Purchase Of Flat Before The Time Available For Filing The Return U/S 139 & Thus Eligible For Deduction U/S 54 Of The Act Even If The Sale Deed Was Executed Subsequently. He Has Further Erred In Observing That Assessee Has Failed To Produce Documentary Evidence In Support Of Claim Ignoring That The Same Was Filed Before The Drp. 2. The Ld. Ao Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Making Addition Of Rs. 7,41,700/- In Respect Of Cash Deposit In The Bank Account U/S 68 Of The Act As Per The Direction Of Drp. He Has Further Erred In Holding That Assessee Failed To Produce Documentary Evidence In Support Of Averments In The Affidavit.

capital gain has been invested in purchase of flat before the time available for filing the return u/s 139 and thus eligible for deduction u/s 54 of the Act even if the sale deed was executed subsequently. He has further erred in observing that assessee has failed to produce documentary evidence in support of claim ignoring that the same

ROYAL CALCUTTA TURF CLUB. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-22, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sajnay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Royal Calcutta Turf Club Acit, Circle-22, Kolkata. C/O M/S. Salarpuria Jajodia & Vs. Co., 7, C. R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal-700072. (Pan:Aaaar0769A) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Capital Gain 992,875/- 3. Income from Other Sources 5,19,69,617/- 4. Add. – House Property deduction @ 30% 19,39,79,159/- (treating as business income) 5. Add. Expenditure towards Horse Welfare 2,00,00,000/- 6. Add. U/s. 43B (prior period expense) 14,90,447/- 7. Add – Entrance Fees as revenue receipt

MOUL SHREE JHUNJHUNWALA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-12(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 426/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Moul Shree Jhunjhunwala,……………….……Appellant 58/3, Kutir Udyog Kendra, Biplabi Rash Behari Basu Road, Canning Street, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Acqpj6330E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 23Rd, 2024 O R D E R

capital gain by trading in penny stock. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer has rightly undertaken this exercise. 8. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. A perusal of the reasons to believe would reveal that in the first four lines, ld. Assessing Officer is discussing the issue regarding undisclosed TDS

M/S COAL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA

Capital gains, (F).-Income\nfrom other sources.'\nAs per section 56 of the Act, 'Income' would be 'Income from other\nsources' as per the provision of Section 56, which reads as follows.\n'Section 56. Income from other sources\n'Income of every kind which is not to be excluded from the total\nincome under this Act shall be chargeable

BIKASH KUMAR MONDAL,ARAMBAGH vs. ITO WARD 1(4) HOOGHLY, CHINSURA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz)

TDS on transport charges under section 194C of the Act; and secondly, undisclosed income of capital gains for Rs.6,25,000/- on sale

MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

TDS should have been deducted at the rate of 10% u/s 194A of the Act. Finally, the AO disallowed 30% of the above interest payment being disallowance u/s 40a(ia) of the Act. In our opinion the provisions of Section 40a(ia) cannot be invoked where there is a short deduction of tax at source but in a case, where

SUKHDHAM INFRASTRUCTURES LLP,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-40(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

TDS, income tax and service tax. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, adduce or amend any ground on or at the time of hearing of the appeal. 3 I.T.A. No. 2611/Kol/2019 I.T.A No. 148/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sukhdham Infrastructures LLP 3. Issue raised in ground no. 1 is a legal issue challenging the order

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-40, KOLKATA vs. M/S SUKHDHAM INFRASTRUCTURES LLP, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

TDS, income tax and service tax. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, adduce or amend any ground on or at the time of hearing of the appeal. 3 I.T.A. No. 2611/Kol/2019 I.T.A No. 148/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sukhdham Infrastructures LLP 3. Issue raised in ground no. 1 is a legal issue challenging the order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

gain, etc. Accordingly, the assessee was called upon to furnish the details which were furnished by the assessee by submitting that the ITA Nos.1728 & 1729/KOL/2024 Dollar Holding Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 15-16 and 17-18 amalgamating company as on the date of merger had investments amounting to ₹93,01,00,000/- which was acquired by the assessee company pursuant

DEPUTY COMMISSOENR OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

gain, etc. Accordingly, the assessee was called upon to furnish the details which were furnished by the assessee by submitting that the ITA Nos.1728 & 1729/KOL/2024 Dollar Holding Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 15-16 and 17-18 amalgamating company as on the date of merger had investments amounting to ₹93,01,00,000/- which was acquired by the assessee company pursuant

BIG BOSS FOODS PVT. LTD.,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIR. 1, BURDWAN

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

TDS on interest paid u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act'). On the basis of information gathered on records, ld. AO re-opened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 22.12.2018 after obtaining the necessary approval u/s 151(1) of the Act from