M/S SALARPURIA SOFT ZONE,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RG - 56,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

105 of 2014 dated 15.07.2014 held in respect to controversy regarding the date on which the project was completed to be eligible for the benefit of section 80IB of the Act. Hon’ble High court held as under: 6. One of the project has been sanctioned subsequent to the Act. The point of controversy is regarding the date on which

M/S SALARPURIA SOFT ZONE,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RG - 56,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

105 of 2014 dated 15.07.2014 held in respect to controversy regarding the date on which the project was completed to be eligible for the benefit of section 80IB of the Act. Hon’ble High court held as under: 6. One of the project has been sanctioned subsequent to the Act. The point of controversy is regarding the date on which

I.T.O WD - 56(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SALARPURIA SOFT ZONE, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

105 of 2014 dated 15.07.2014 held in respect to controversy regarding the date on which the project was completed to be eligible for the benefit of section 80IB of the Act. Hon’ble High court held as under: 6. One of the project has been sanctioned subsequent to the Act. The point of controversy is regarding the date on which

M/S BENGAL SHRISTI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Properties (supra) held as follows:- “Whether construction of building 'E' constitutes a 'housing project under section 80- IB(10) The expression 'housing project' is neither defined under section 2 of the Act nor under section 80-IB(10). Even under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1988 as also under the Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai, 1991, the expression 'housing

DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue(in ITA No

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.986 & 987/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12& 2012-13) D.C.I.T, Circle-6(1), Vs. M/S. National Engineering

House Property without considering the decision of the latest Judgment reported in 249 ITR 47 (Cal). We are unable to admit the appeal as it is recorded by the Learned Tribunal that Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of [CIT vs. MODEL MFG. CO.] reported

DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue(in ITA No

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.986 & 987/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12& 2012-13) D.C.I.T, Circle-6(1), Vs. M/S. National Engineering

House Property without considering the decision of the latest Judgment reported in 249 ITR 47 (Cal). We are unable to admit the appeal as it is recorded by the Learned Tribunal that Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of [CIT vs. MODEL MFG. CO.] reported

ALLAHABAD BANK,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

105 under section 91 of the Income Tax Act for tax paid in Hongkong in respect of profit of branch situated therein and accordingly, direction may be given to the Learned Assessing Officer to allow opportunity to appellant to adduce necessary evidence for justifying its claim.’ 27. Further, the issue in additional ground no. 1 raised by assessee

A.C.I.T CIR - 30,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHREE UMESH HIRANAND CHABLANI, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

section 10(38) of the Act in respect of Long Term Capital Gains. Assessee also income from the house property in Mumbai to the tune of Rs. 14,77,535/- under two agreements namely, agreement for rent for flat and other is for Hire charges for furniture and fixtures. 3. AO treated the loss under Short Term Capital Gains

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA vs. TCG URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

105 taxmann.com 103 (Mumbai­Trib) IN THE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH ‘ C ‘ Deputy Commissioner of Income­tax, Mumbai v. PPFAS Asset Management (P) Ltd. PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT APPEAL NO. 6687 (MUM)OF 2017 {ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013­14] MARCH 13, 2019 Section 37(1), read with section 3 of the Income­tax Act, 1961 and Regulation

ACIT, CIR-31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL HOUSING BOARD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 56 of the Act. Where a person has only one source of income, which is business, there could hardly be any other inference. In the case of Snam Progetti S.P.A. vs. Add!. CIT [1981J 132 ITR 70 the Delhi High Court took a broad view and considered interest as incidental to business income, because it cannot be presumed that

AADARSH LADDHA, LEGAL HEIR OF KAILASH CHAND LADDHA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 37(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1013/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Aadarsh Laddha,………………….………...……Appellant (Legal Heir Of Kailash Chand Laddha) 31, Giri Babu Lane, Kolkata-700012, W.B. [Pan:Abapl2499R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-37(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place West, Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri Sidhharth Kejriwal, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 31, 2025 O R D E R

house property amounting to Rs.33,600/- and income from other sources of Rs.59,104 and claimed deduction under chapter-VIA of Rs.2,27,049/- and finally arrived at the total income of Rs.10,55,930/-.As per audited profit & loss account, it is seen that a total expenses [Rs.6,10,525/- + Rs.4,17,700/-] i.e. in total Rs.10

PURUSHOTTAM DAS AGARWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 35(1) , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Years :2012-13 Soumitra Choudhury V/S. Acit, Circle-12 28C, Satish Mukherjee 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Road, Kolkata-700026 Kidwai Road, [Pan No.Acnpc 4627 Q] Kolkarta-16 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 13-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing Assessment Year :2015-16 Purushottam Das Agarwal V/S. Income Tax Officer, C/O Balaji Enterprises, Ward-35(1), Aayakar 83/85 N.S. Road, Ground Bhawan Porva, 110, Floor, Kolkata Shantipally, Kokata- [Pan No.Actpa 9138 Q] 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Subash Agarwal Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- These Two Assessees Have Filed Their Instant Appeal(S) For Assessment Year(S) 2012-13 & 2015-16 Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax

Properties Private Limited ITAT No 105 of 2016 h. Smita S Patil v. ACIT (ITA No.1407-1409/PN/2012), i. ITAT Kolkata in the case of DCIT v. Sunita Khemka (ITA No 714 to 718/Kol/2011) j. CIT vs. Shyam R Pawar [2015] 54 taxmann.com 108, (Bombay High Court) k. CIT v. Smt Sumitra Devi, ITA No. 54/2012, Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan

SOUMITRA CHOUDHURY ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 22 , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Years :2012-13 Soumitra Choudhury V/S. Acit, Circle-12 28C, Satish Mukherjee 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Road, Kolkata-700026 Kidwai Road, [Pan No.Acnpc 4627 Q] Kolkarta-16 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 13-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing Assessment Year :2015-16 Purushottam Das Agarwal V/S. Income Tax Officer, C/O Balaji Enterprises, Ward-35(1), Aayakar 83/85 N.S. Road, Ground Bhawan Porva, 110, Floor, Kolkata Shantipally, Kokata- [Pan No.Actpa 9138 Q] 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Subash Agarwal Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- These Two Assessees Have Filed Their Instant Appeal(S) For Assessment Year(S) 2012-13 & 2015-16 Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax

Properties Private Limited ITAT No 105 of 2016 h. Smita S Patil v. ACIT (ITA No.1407-1409/PN/2012), i. ITAT Kolkata in the case of DCIT v. Sunita Khemka (ITA No 714 to 718/Kol/2011) j. CIT vs. Shyam R Pawar [2015] 54 taxmann.com 108, (Bombay High Court) k. CIT v. Smt Sumitra Devi, ITA No. 54/2012, Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan

ASHOK VIKRAM PODDAR,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE -34, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

house property, capital gain and other sources. We note that the assessee has withdrawn Rs. 20.00 Lacs from its saving bank account with Allahabad Bank, Raipur and again redeposited Rs. 19.75 Lacs on various dates. The gap between the withdrawals of the money and redeposits in the same bank account range between nine days to three months. The details

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-49(1), KOLKATA vs. SHRI RATAN KUMAR SAHA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Ratan Kumar Saha Acit, Cir-49(1&2), Kolkata 299, Gorakshabasi Road, Vs. Dum Dum – 700 028. Pan: Alcps 9290 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Cir-49(1), Kolkata Shri Ratan Kumar Saha Vs. 299, Gorakshabasi Road, Dum Dum – 700 028. Pan: Alcps 9290 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Acit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.07.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Vide Order Dated 08.11.2019 Which Is Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax, 1961 Dated 30.12.2016. Consequent To That Another Cross Appeal Is Also Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 154/Kol/2020 Against The Same Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A). Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Enumerated As Under: Assessee’S Ground: “I. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Grossly Unjustified In Not Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 13,69,590/- Under The Head A.Y. 2014-15

section 50C of the IT Act. However, the assessee had not disclosed any such information in his return. A.Y. 2014-15 3. During the course of hearing, the assessee accepted the transaction as a case of transfer of property on relinquishment of assets or extinguishment of right to claim as the asset is an agricultural land the gain

SHRI RATAN KUMAR SAHA,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-49(1&2), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Ratan Kumar Saha Acit, Cir-49(1&2), Kolkata 299, Gorakshabasi Road, Vs. Dum Dum – 700 028. Pan: Alcps 9290 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Cir-49(1), Kolkata Shri Ratan Kumar Saha Vs. 299, Gorakshabasi Road, Dum Dum – 700 028. Pan: Alcps 9290 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Acit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.07.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Vide Order Dated 08.11.2019 Which Is Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax, 1961 Dated 30.12.2016. Consequent To That Another Cross Appeal Is Also Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 154/Kol/2020 Against The Same Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A). Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Enumerated As Under: Assessee’S Ground: “I. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Grossly Unjustified In Not Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 13,69,590/- Under The Head A.Y. 2014-15

section 50C of the IT Act. However, the assessee had not disclosed any such information in his return. A.Y. 2014-15 3. During the course of hearing, the assessee accepted the transaction as a case of transfer of property on relinquishment of assets or extinguishment of right to claim as the asset is an agricultural land the gain

M/S. SURENDRA KUMAR SAMSUKHA HUF,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

105 pages and to Page 1 which contains the details of purchase and sale of the shares and the calculation of capital gains. Our attention was drawn to page no.2 of the paper book which is the purchase bill of 400 shares of M/s. BREPL on 28.10.2011. We note that M/s. Jwalaji Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. sold 400 equity shares

SRI SANJEEV JHUNJHUNWALA, HUF,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 48(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Sangita Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 77/79 Sri Arobinda Road, Ward-47(2), 3, Govt. V/S. Salkia, Howrah-711106 Place (West), Kolkata- [Pan No.Aeypj 0474 M] 700 106 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjeev Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 61 Ashutosh Mukherjee Ward-36(3), Aayakar V/S. Lane, Salkia, Bhawan Poorva, Howrah-711106 Kolkata-700 106 [Pan No.Acppj 8989 E] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjeev Jhunjhunwala Income Tax Officer, बनाम / (Huf), 77/79 Sri Arobinda Ward-48(4), 3, Govt. V/S. Road, Salkia, Howrah- Place (West), Kolkata- 711106 700 101 [Pan No.Aaehs 5311 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Ashok Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 109, Netaji Subhas Road, Ward-34(2), Aayakar V/S. Goyee House, Kolkata-001 Bhawan, Poorva, [Pan No.Acppj 8990 D] Kolkata-700 107

House, 18, Deshpriya Park Road, Kolkata-700026 Contact No. 033 30015555. 3. Contract Notes issued regarding sale of equity shares of Unno Industries Ltd. on Bombay Stock Exchange by SEBI registered brokers- Ashika Stock Broking Ltd. and Guiness Securities ltd. are enclosed. Annexure V. 4. The relevant Demat Account statements of Ashika Stock Broking Ltd. and Guiness Securities Ltd. reflecting