D.C.I.T CC - V,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SALSAR STOCK BROKING LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assesses are allowed

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 73 of the Act and after making minor disallowances and determining total income of Rs. 1,73,55,290/-. Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAA of the Act was initiated by the Learned AO. 5. The assessee pleaded before the Learned AO that the assessee had made disclosure petition u/s 132(4

DCIT, CC-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMICUS REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

4 crores was paid. The AO has recorded that this 'Banka ji' was identified, post search as one Subhas Kumar Banka, who in his statement u/s 131 has admitted to having sold a company, M/S Satyam Investment and Finance Ltd to Krishna Kumar Singhania, the main person of the present appellant. Having made the above reference, there is no further

DCIT, C.C.XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PRATAP PROPERTIES LTD., KOLKATA

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue for all the assessment years are dismissed

Bench: Hon. Sri Mahavir Singh & Hon. Sri M.Balaganesh

132(4) of the Act without appreciating that the assessee has made the disclosure in the Assessment Years 2006-07 and the immunity under Explanation 5 to Section 271(1)( c) is available for the years for which the return is yet to be furnished before the expiry of time limit under section 139(1) of the Act whereas

JAIN INFRA PROJECTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1237/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) Jain Infra Projects Ltd., Vs. Acit, Cc-Iv, 39, Shakespeare Sarai, Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra Kolkata-700017 Sarani, Kolkata-700001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccb 9831 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1244/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) Manoj Kumar Jain & Sons Vs. Acit, Cc-Iv, Kolkata (Huf) Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra 39, Shakespeare Sarai, Sarani, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700017 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaihm9669P .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

4) of section 132 admits the undisclosed income and specifies the manner in which such income has been derived; (ii) substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived; and (iii) pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed Income. From the plain reading of the above section it is apparent that penalty will

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN & SONS (HUF),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1237/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) Jain Infra Projects Ltd., Vs. Acit, Cc-Iv, 39, Shakespeare Sarai, Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra Kolkata-700017 Sarani, Kolkata-700001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccb 9831 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1244/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) Manoj Kumar Jain & Sons Vs. Acit, Cc-Iv, Kolkata (Huf) Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra 39, Shakespeare Sarai, Sarani, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700017 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaihm9669P .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

4) of section 132 admits the undisclosed income and specifies the manner in which such income has been derived; (ii) substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived; and (iii) pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed Income. From the plain reading of the above section it is apparent that penalty will

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

disallowed by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) is also deleted in view of the discussion above. The grounds raised by the assessee challenging the addition on merit are accordingly allowed.” Therefore in my considered opinion, since purchases were never disputed by the AO in earlier years, the AO cannot doubt the sale & its proceeds. The share purchasing

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

disallowed by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) is also deleted in view of the discussion above. The grounds raised by the assessee challenging the addition on merit are accordingly allowed.” Therefore in my considered opinion, since purchases were never disputed by the AO in earlier years, the AO cannot doubt the sale & its proceeds. The share purchasing

M/S. GARG BROTHERS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am ]

disallowance under section 14A, amortization of capital issue expenditure. Thus, it is noted that the total undisclosed income of Rs.3,78,57,991/- which was offered as undisclosed income of assessee u/s. 132(4

M/S. CLIFF TREXIM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

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

disallowance under section 14A, amortization of capital issue expenditure. Thus, it is noted that the total undisclosed income of Rs.3,78,57,991/- which was offered as undisclosed income of assessee u/s. 132(4

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC - 3(3),, KOLKATA

132 (4) do not by themselves constitute\nincriminating material. A copy of the statement together with the\nopportunity to cross-examine the deponent has to provided to the\nassessee. If the statement is retracted and/or if cross-examination is\nnot provided, the statement has to be discarded. The onus of\nensuring the presence of the deponent cannot be shifted

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VIVEK GUPTA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

132(4) of the Act. It has been held by the various High Courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court that a statement made under section 133A, stands alone, has no evidentiary value. The Ld. CIT(A) in this respect has also placed reliance upon the CBDT letter no 286/2/2003-IT (Inv) dated 03.10.2003, which clearly states that statement recorded under

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

132 (4) do not by themselves constitute\nincriminating material. A copy of the statement together with the\nopportunity to cross-examine the deponent has to provided to the\nassessee. If the statement is retracted and/or if cross-examination is\nnot provided, the statement has to be discarded. The onus of\nensuring the presence of the deponent cannot be shifted

TATA METALIKS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

132(KER) that no further deductions and allowances other than stipulated in Explanation 1 are available. The Honourable Apex Court on the interpretation of provisions has held in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. Union of India reported in [2012J 17 taxmann.com 202 (Se) as follows:- "71 We have to give effect to the language of the section

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TATA METALIKS LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

132(KER) that no further deductions and allowances other than stipulated in Explanation 1 are available. The Honourable Apex Court on the interpretation of provisions has held in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. Union of India reported in [2012J 17 taxmann.com 202 (Se) as follows:- "71 We have to give effect to the language of the section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AVIMA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Accordingly the ground No. 2 is dismissed by upholding the order of Ld

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Central Circle 4(3) Avima Exports Private Limited 4Th Ns Road, Dalhousie, Kolkata, 110, Shantipally, Vs. Kolkata-700107, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca5857N Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

132(4) of the Act. It has been held by the various High Courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court that a statement made under section 133A, stands alone, has no evidentiary value. The Ld. CIT(A) in this respect has also placed reliance upon the CBDT letter no 286/2/2003-IT (Inv) dated 03.10.2003, which clearly states that statement recorded under

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PRIVI EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Accordingly the ground No. 2 is dismissed by upholding the order of Ld

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

132(4) of the Act. It has been held by the various High Courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court that a statement made under section 133A, stands alone, has no evidentiary value. The Ld. CIT(A) in this respect has also placed reliance upon the CBDT letter no 286/2/2003-IT (Inv) dated 03.10.2003, which clearly states that statement recorded under

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

disallowance of excess claim of depreciation to the extent of Rs.3,16,92,148/- is directed to be deleted. Ground Nos.6 to 10 are therefore allowed.” 10. It has come on record qua the assessee already succeeded in the instant twin aspects before the Tribunal in Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2011-12. The Revenue is very very fair

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

disallowance of excess claim of depreciation to the extent of Rs.3,16,92,148/- is directed to be deleted. Ground Nos.6 to 10 are therefore allowed.” 10. It has come on record qua the assessee already succeeded in the instant twin aspects before the Tribunal in Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2011-12. The Revenue is very very fair