PEERLESS HOTELS LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-8(2), KOL, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 545/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Peerless Hotels Limited,..........................Appellant 12, J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata-700013 [Pan: Aabcp9484D] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-8(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, 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 : August 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 07, 2023

disallowance. Therefore, the assessee could not buttress its case on the strength of the above decisions. We do not find any merit in these grounds of appeal. They are rejected. 9. In Ground No. 5, the assessee has pleaded that when no income was brought to tax under sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C or 69D

SRIDHARPUR CO-OPERATIVE BANK,BARDHAMAN vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), BURDWAN

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowance should me made under section 68 for SBN deposited during demonetisetion period, if assesses filed details of such deposits. a) Yagnavalkya Souhardha Credit Co. Ltd. Vs. ITO WARD-5(2)(4) Bangalore ITAT "B" Bench Bangalore ITA No 1086/Bang/2022 b) Om Sai Co-Op. Credit Souharda Sahakari Niyamit vs PCIT Hubli ITA No.454/Bang/2022 ITAT "C" Bench Bangalore

ALISHAN STEELS (P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

69D." The intention of the legislature in introducing the amendment, as stated in the explanatory note, is to avoid unnecessary litigation and to expressly provide that no set off of any loss shall be allowable in respect of income under section 68. Therefore, it has to be held that, as on the relevant date of the assessment, there

ALISHAN STEELS PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

69D." The intention of the legislature in introducing the amendment, as stated in the explanatory note, is to avoid unnecessary litigation and to expressly provide that no set off of any loss shall be allowable in respect of income under section 68. Therefore, it has to be held that, as on the relevant date of the assessment, there

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

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

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Seth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

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

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

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

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

D.C.I.T., CC - 3(1),, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

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

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3.1, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Seth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

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

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Seth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1),, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

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

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and\nappeals of the revenue are dismissed

disallowing the entire expenditure.We do not find any\nerror in the view of the Tribunal. No question of law arises.\"\nIt is further observed that the AO had relied upon the decision of the\nGujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and took the\nview that entire purchases could not be added as bogus but what\nneeded

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, HOOGLY, HOOGHLY vs. SWAPAN KUMAR MONDAL, HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Hooghly……...……...………………...……..Appellant Swapan Kumar Mondal..…….…..…….……………………..…………………………………..……….…..Respondent Uttarayan Station Road Chinsurah R.S. Dist. Hooghly Pin – 712 102 [Pan : Aedpm 6336 A]

disallowed for the reasons given in the assessment order and the total income assessed at Rs.67,43,445/- 2.1. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal. 3. The ld. First Appellate Authority, held that the reopening of assessment is bad in law. He squashed the assessment proceedings and did not deal with the merits of the issue. 4. Aggrieved

HIRANMOY DAS,DURGAPUR vs. PCIT, ASANSOL

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

Bench: 25.04.2022. 3. That There Is A Delay Of 728 (Seven Hundred & Twenty-Eight) Days In Filing The Appeal.

disallowed, for which the Ld. AO was given suitable directions. Secondly, it was held that an amount of Rs. 1,83,70,974/- should have suffered enhanced tax rate u/s 115BBE of the Act at par with the addition on account of unexplained sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 1,00,42,334/-. 4. Before us, the Ld. AR has taken