MANOJ JAIN,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-29(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargshri Rajesh Kumar]

penalty levied under section 271(1)(a) of the Act was not valid. Thus, ouranswers to all the three questions referred to this court are in the negative and in favour of the assessee. 17. Anand And Co. (supra) cited by the Revenue, proceeds on the basis that the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act did contain a signature

RAGHUVIR RETAILERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Pcit-2 Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan P-7, Mandawa Shikhar, 151, Sarat Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Bose Road, Kolkata-700026, Vs. 700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaecr8231M Assessee By : Shri S.M. Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.02.2024

penalty levied under section 271(1)(a) of the Act was not valid. Thus, ouranswers to all the three questions referred to this court are in the negative and in favour of the assessee. Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2013-14 17. Anand And Co. (supra) cited by the Revenue, proceeds on the basis that the notice issued u/s.148

M/S VIBHUTI MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the Assessing Officer by stating that the assessee received Rs.10,00,000/- from M/s Gajgamini Commodities on account of sale of shares. However, the Assessing Officer without doing any verification on the evidences furnished by the assessee which comprises of ledger account, bank statement, ITR, Balance Sheet etc. of Gajgamini Commodities Pvt. Ltd. The ld AO came to the conclusion that the assessee has not prove the genuineness of the transaction and consequently added amount to the income

penalty levied under section 271(1)(a) of the Act was not valid. Thus, ouranswers to all the three questions referred to this court are in the negative and in favour of the assessee. 17. Anand And Co. (supra) cited by the Revenue, proceeds on the basis that the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act did contain a signature

ITO WD-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SAPPHIRE GLOBAL FINANCE (P) LTD, KOLKATA

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) and general grounds. As these grounds are\nconsequential, these grounds are dismissed as infructuous.\n5.5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is partly allowed.\n6.\nAfter hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available\non record, we find that the assessee company has disposed its\ninvestments amounting

TIGERHILL TRADELINK PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 10(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Appellant is Dismissed

u/s 147 r.w.s.\n144B of the Act dated 29.05.2023, respectively. Since the issues in both\nthe appeals are for the same assessee, they were heard together and are\nbeing decided by this common order for the sake of convenience and\nbrevity\n2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following\ngrounds of appeal:\nI. ITA No.: 956/KOL/2025

TIGERHILL TRADELINK PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 10(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Appellant is Dismissed

u/s 147 r.w.s.\n144B of the Act dated 29.05.2023, respectively. Since the issues in both\nthe appeals are for the same assessee, they were heard together and are\nbeing decided by this common order for the sake of convenience and\nbrevity\n2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following\ngrounds of appeal:\nI. ITA No.: 956/KOL/2025

ITO WD-3(1), KOLKATA vs. SAPPHIRE GLOBAL FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

section 133(6) of the Act, the said Khetan Tracon Pvt. Ltd. officially confirmed the transaction. ii) The appellant disposed of investments amounting to Rs.50,00,000/- to Prateek Plastometals Private Limited of P-64/65, Pagladanga Udyan Industrial Estate, Kolkata – 700015 having PAN: AAECP4953E. It received the total dues of Rs.50,00,000/- from the said party against such

ITO WD 3(1), KOLKATA vs. SAPPHIRE GLOBAL FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

section 133(6) of the Act, the said Khetan Tracon Pvt. Ltd. officially confirmed the transaction. ii) The appellant disposed of investments amounting to Rs.50,00,000/- to Prateek Plastometals Private Limited of P-64/65, Pagladanga Udyan Industrial Estate, Kolkata – 700015 having PAN: AAECP4953E. It received the total dues of Rs.50,00,000/- from the said party against such

UMANG WEBTECH PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act is initiated separately for concealment of particulars of income of Rs. 35,00,000/-. In course of assessment proceedings, it was noted that the assessee claimed loss of Rs. 18,26,160/- in the current year. In spite of given number of opportunities as discussed in foregoing para the assessee failed

M/S ABHMAN DISTRIBUTOR PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) are being initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” 3.1 The credits in the bank statement are mentioned at para 4.5 and the list furnished by the assessee is mentioned at para 6 of the order of the Ld. AO. Accordingly, in the absence of any satisfactory explanation, the cash credits