DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMAR KUMAR AGARWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

unexplained money of the assessee as per section 69A of the Act and opined that the assessee had failed to explain the nature & sources of such receipts. It is apposite to mention that total unaccounted sales cannot be treated as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. It is a common knowledge that if there are sales, there should

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMAR KUMAR AGARWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

unexplained money of the assessee as per section 69A of the Act and opined that the assessee had failed to explain the nature & sources of such receipts. It is apposite to mention that total unaccounted sales cannot be treated as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. It is a common knowledge that if there are sales, there should

AMAR KUMAR AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 4(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

unexplained money of the assessee as per section 69A of the Act and opined that the assessee had failed to explain the nature & sources of such receipts. It is apposite to mention that total unaccounted sales cannot be treated as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. It is a common knowledge that if there are sales, there should

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMAR KUMAR AGARWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

unexplained money of the assessee as per section 69A of the Act and opined that the assessee had failed to explain the nature & sources of such receipts. It is apposite to mention that total unaccounted sales cannot be treated as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. It is a common knowledge that if there are sales, there should

RAJ SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act in the assessment framed on 29.02.2024. 3.2. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the assessee has failed to prove the veracity of income and standard deduction was rightly disallowed

RAJ SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act in the assessment framed on 29.02.2024. 3.2. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the assessee has failed to prove the veracity of income and standard deduction was rightly disallowed

RAJ SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act in the assessment framed on 29.02.2024. 3.2. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the assessee has failed to prove the veracity of income and standard deduction was rightly disallowed

RAJ SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act in the assessment framed on 29.02.2024. 3.2. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the assessee has failed to prove the veracity of income and standard deduction was rightly disallowed

SRI JOY BARMAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-42(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

unexplained money and cessation of liability on basis of lack of evidence. Though the assessee’s explanation in respect of the credit card transactions and cessation of liability in the absence of sufficient proof was not accepted, that would not mean that the assessee made any deliberate attempt towards concealment of particulars of income. Mere sustaining of addition

SRI JOY BARMAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-42(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

unexplained money and cessation of liability on basis of lack of evidence. Though the assessee’s explanation in respect of the credit card transactions and cessation of liability in the absence of sufficient proof was not accepted, that would not mean that the assessee made any deliberate attempt towards concealment of particulars of income. Mere sustaining of addition

M/S FRONTLINE COMMODEAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the issues raised in the instant appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

money of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit whereas all the information were duly on records. 9. For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 14.1. Since, we have already decided the issue in ground no. 2 & 3 in ITA No. 1395/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 in assessee’s appeal, wherein assessee has challenged the part sustaining of addition

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 14.1. Since, we have already decided the issue in ground no. 2 & 3 in ITA No. 1395/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 in assessee’s appeal, wherein assessee has challenged the part sustaining of addition

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 14.1. Since, we have already decided the issue in ground no. 2 & 3 in ITA No. 1395/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 in assessee’s appeal, wherein assessee has challenged the part sustaining of addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 14.1. Since, we have already decided the issue in ground no. 2 & 3 in ITA No. 1395/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 in assessee’s appeal, wherein assessee has challenged the part sustaining of addition

GOPAL & SONS HUF,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 32(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 14.1. Since, we have already decided the issue in ground no. 2 & 3 in ITA No. 1395/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 in assessee’s appeal, wherein assessee has challenged the part sustaining of addition

SATI NATH CHATTERJEE,BANKURA vs. I.T.O., WARD-3(1), BANKURA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

unexplained money does not arise and so addition u/s. 69A of the Act is not legally sustainable. Therefore, the addition made by the authorities below on the facts and circumstances of the case is erroneous and, therefore, even though for whatever reason/over-sight the assessee had not disclosed the loan as liability in the balance sheet and since the incurring

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND LEASE FIN PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act.\n14. 1. Since, we have already decided the issue in ground no. 2 & 3 in\nITA No. 1395/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2015-16 in assessee's appeal, wherein\nassessee has challenged the part sustaining of addition