M/S. VIJAYSHREE AUTOCOM LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(3) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

disallowances made by learned assessing officer is contrary to the law and facts of the case. 2. That the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) 21, Kolkata erred in law as well as on facts of the case by not deleted the penalty-imposed u/s 271AAB on the ground the ld. Assessing Officer has failed to specify

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]

income to the tune of Rs.40 lakhs and certain disallowance under section 14A, amortization of capital issue expenditure. Thus, it is noted that the total undisclosed

ITO, WARD - 25(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. SMT. MANJU DEVI , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

undisclosed income, the ld. CIT(A) held as follows:- “8. I have considered the submission of the assessee and “8. I have considered the submission of the assessee and perused assessment order. perused assessment order. The A.O. made the disallowance

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDUSTRIAL SAFETY PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

income, the AO had made disallowance of Rs.2,92,805/- out of business promotion expenses. The tax of Rs.1 ,06,834/ - referred to by the AO as payable in the impugned penalty order related to disallowance made out of business promotion expenses. Admittedly the amount disallowed was not considered by the AO to be 'undisclosed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AMRIT HATCHERIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

undisclosed income' and consequently penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act is leviable for the same. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue in this regard are allowed. 7. The next issue to be decided in this appeal in ITA No. 2305/Kol/2016 is as to whether the levy of penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act was justified on account of denial

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

undisclosed income. It is further recorded that the voluntary action on the part of the assessee to settle the tax issues for peace of mind appears from the conduct of the assessee. While recording the aforesaid fact, the Learned Tribunal ultimately relied on a decision of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Additional CIT vs Prem Chand Garg

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)

undisclosed income Thus, while in view of the mandate of sub-section (1) of section 153A of the Act, in every case where there is a search or requisition, the Assessing Officer is obliged to issue notice to such person to furnish returns of income for the six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. M/S AMRIT HATCHERIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 2304 & 2305/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Cc-2(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Amrit Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacca 5987 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

undisclosed income’ and consequently penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act is leviable for the same. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue in this regard are allowed. 7. The next issue to be decided in this appeal in ITA No. 2305/Kol/2016 is as to whether the levy of penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act was justified on account of denial

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)

disallowance made of Rs.51,50,000/-. The penalty so levied is wrong and need to be deleted.” 5.1. Ld. AR for the assessee has submitted that penalty u/s.271AAA cannot be levied if the assessee admits the undisclosed income

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)

disallowance made of Rs.51,50,000/-. The penalty so levied is wrong and need to be deleted.” 5.1. Ld. AR for the assessee has submitted that penalty u/s.271AAA cannot be levied if the assessee admits the undisclosed income

HARISH KUMAR SARAWGI,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1222 To 1226/Kol/2011 Assessment Years: 2003-04 To 2007-08

undisclosed income could not have been unearthed, the Learned AR argued that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT vs Amardeep Singh Dhanjal in ITA No. 39 of 2010 dated 11.1.2013. 5.3. At this juncture, it would be relevant to address the amendment brought

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI HARISH KUMAR SARAWGI, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1222 To 1226/Kol/2011 Assessment Years: 2003-04 To 2007-08

undisclosed income could not have been unearthed, the Learned AR argued that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT vs Amardeep Singh Dhanjal in ITA No. 39 of 2010 dated 11.1.2013. 5.3. At this juncture, it would be relevant to address the amendment brought

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowing period expenditure amounting to Rs. 19,25,000/- without appreciating that the expenditure crystallized during the year. 3) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in adding Rs. 1,92,32,107/- alleging the same as undisclosed income

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

undisclosed income both under the normal provisions and while computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act. 4) That the appellant craves leave to add to and/or alter, amend, modify or rescind the grounds hereinabove before or at the hearing of this appeal.” 2.1 The Revenue has raised the following revised grounds of appeal in ITA No. 622/KOL/2018

AMIT KUMAR SEN,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 23(1), , HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.388/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Amit Kumar Sen, Vs Acit, Circle-23(1), Hooghly Sahapur, Tarakeswar, Hooghly (Wb)-712410 Pan No. :Aavfs 6967 R (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Ray, Shri S.N.Patra & Shri Trideep Nayak, Ars रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Addl/Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 27.12.2024 Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1071619653(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. Shri P.K.Ray, Shri S.N.Patra & Shri Trideep Nayak, Ld. Ars Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Ld. Sr.Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Was Specifically Asked To Point Out How The Assessee Has Responded To The Chart Issued By The Assessing Officer, Which Is Recorded In Page 3 Of The Assessment Order. Other Than Referring To Various Replies That Have Been Filed By The Assessee, Which Were Uploaded From The Portal, No Specific Reply To The Said Para Was Pointed Out. Admittedly, The Assessee Has Not Been Able To Dislodge The Said Chart.

undisclosed stock, when audited accounts and ledgers were furnished, would likely be challenged successfully and should be deleted from the total income. Grounds for Appeal Against Disallowance

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

undisclosed income within the meaning of section 271AAA. (3) That the ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee by not considering the fact that the provisions of Clause (ii) of Sub- 1 ITA No.1082/Kol/2013-B-AM M/s. Salasar Stock Broking Ltd section (2) of Sec. 271AAA has not been fulfilled in the assessee’s case. “ 4. The brief facts

SABITA DEY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CC-XVIII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, this Ground of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) I.T.A. No. 55/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Prabhadevi Murarka…………………....................................................................................…………Appellant 1/C, Madevilla Garden Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Afdpm 2245 R] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-Xviii, Kolkata…………………..…………………..Respondent I.T.A. No. 56/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sharmita Murarka……………………....................................................................................…………Appellant 1/C, Madevilla Garden Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Afdpm 1477 K] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-Xviii, Kolkata……………………………………..Respondent I.T.A. No. 57/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sabita Dey…………………………………....................................................................................…………Appellant 1/C, Madevilla Garden Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Aaipd 9654 M] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-Xviii, Kolkata……………………………………..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Radhe Shyam, Cit, D/R Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 18Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 1St, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

income at ₹ 50,57,790/-interalia making an addition on account of undisclosed interalia making an addition on account of undisclosed interalia making an addition on account of undisclosed investment in jewellery of ₹ 42,29,894/ ₹ 42,29,894/- and undisclosed making charges of ornaments and undisclosed making charges of ornaments of Rs.42,492/-. 3.2. Aggrieved the assessee carried

PRABHADEVI MURARKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CC - XVIII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, this Ground of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) I.T.A. No. 55/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Prabhadevi Murarka…………………....................................................................................…………Appellant 1/C, Madevilla Garden Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Afdpm 2245 R] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-Xviii, Kolkata…………………..…………………..Respondent I.T.A. No. 56/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sharmita Murarka……………………....................................................................................…………Appellant 1/C, Madevilla Garden Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Afdpm 1477 K] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-Xviii, Kolkata……………………………………..Respondent I.T.A. No. 57/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sabita Dey…………………………………....................................................................................…………Appellant 1/C, Madevilla Garden Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Aaipd 9654 M] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-Xviii, Kolkata……………………………………..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Radhe Shyam, Cit, D/R Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 18Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 1St, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

income at ₹ 50,57,790/-interalia making an addition on account of undisclosed interalia making an addition on account of undisclosed interalia making an addition on account of undisclosed investment in jewellery of ₹ 42,29,894/ ₹ 42,29,894/- and undisclosed making charges of ornaments and undisclosed making charges of ornaments of Rs.42,492/-. 3.2. Aggrieved the assessee carried