K.Y.S. SPONGE IRON PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1),, KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Any Other Issue.

58,168/- (u/s 69A of the Act) and addition of Rs. 2,12,87,500/- (u/s 68 of the Act). Aggrieved with this, the assessee has approached the Ld. CIT(A) were also he could not succeed on either of the issues. 2 K.Y.S. Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. 1.1 Thereafter, the assessee is seen to have approached the ITAT with

JAS EQUIPMENTS & ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,DURGAPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2,, DURGAPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos. 519 & 520/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Jas Equipments & Engineers Pvt. Limited,…Appellant S-12, Durgapur Industrial Estate, J.P. Avenue, Durgapur-713212, W.B. [Pan:Aabcj9126E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…….Respondent Circle-2, Durgapur, Aayakar Bhawan, City Centre, Durgapur-734101, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 30, 2025 O R D E R

58,183/- and reassessed income under section 143(3) read with section 147 at Rs.1,56,98,303/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 4

JAS EQUIPMENTS & ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,DURGAPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2,, DURGAPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos. 519 & 520/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Jas Equipments & Engineers Pvt. Limited,…Appellant S-12, Durgapur Industrial Estate, J.P. Avenue, Durgapur-713212, W.B. [Pan:Aabcj9126E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…….Respondent Circle-2, Durgapur, Aayakar Bhawan, City Centre, Durgapur-734101, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 30, 2025 O R D E R

58,183/- and reassessed income under section 143(3) read with section 147 at Rs.1,56,98,303/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 4

SUKDEV SEN,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR. 61, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

58, Navi Mumbai-400706. [PAN: BNDPS4119K] vs. ACIT, Circle-61, Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri S. S. Gupta, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : March 26, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : 24th April , 2024 ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant

AJAY GOEL, LEGAL HEIR OF LATE MANJU GOEL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2450/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Ajay Goel (Legal Heir Of Late Manju Goel),…Appellant Flat 4H, 4Th Floor, Lake Plaza, 277, Jessore Road, Lake Town, Kolkata-700048 [Pan:Adcpg2207N] -Vs.- Assessing Officer,…………..……….…………...Respondent National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: March 10, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 28, 2025 O R D E R

58,000/- was added to the income of the assessee under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT

NAVANSH VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceedings for reopening the case U/S 147/148 of the Act which was disposed off vide letter dtd. 06112/2019. Another notice U/S 142(1) of the Act issued on 06.12.2019 in terms of section 129 of the Act. But assessee, not filed any documents as requisitioned uls 142(1) of the Act on 06.12.2019 on the date fixed for furnishing

ITO, WARD-6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAGHUVIR RETAILERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No. 1129/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Income Tax Officer,………………..……………..Appellant Ward-6(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 6Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Limited,.……….....Respondent Mandawa Shikhar, 151, Sarat Bose Road, Kolkata-700026 [Pan:Aaecr8231M] Appearances By: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri Abhisek Bansal, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee

section 68 of the Act, but no response has been submitted by the assessee. 2 Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Limited As a result, the ld. Assessing Officer has added an amount of Rs.1,61,48,750/- to the total income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before

NEETU AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1898/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Neetu Agarwal………………………………………………………….…..……Appellant Flat 6C, Block 2, Shree Ramnagar Residential Complex, Vip Road, Tegharia, W.B – 700052. [Pan: Actpa2426P] Vs. Ito, Kolkata……………..............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Puja Agarwal, A.R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.07.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee Is A Resident Individual, Who Filed Her Return Of Income On 29.12.2021 For The Financial Year 2020-21 Relevant To Assessment Year 2021-22 Reporting A Total Income Of Rs.25,58,440/-. The Assessee Discharged Her Tax Liability By Way Of Tax Deducted At Source Amounting To Rs.2,80,028/-, Self-Assessment Tax Of Rs.22,740/- & Foreign Tax Credit (‘Ftc’) Of Rs.2,25,936/-. The Assessee Also Filed Form.67 Which Was Filed On 25.01.2022. An Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act Was Issued On 28.10.2022 In Which The Ftc Was Not Provided To The Assessee. This Disallowance Resulted In Tax Demand Of Rs.2,79,130/-.

58,440/-. The assessee discharged her tax liability by way of tax deducted at source amounting to Rs.2,80,028/-, self-assessment tax of Rs.22,740/- and foreign tax credit (‘FTC’) of Rs.2,25,936/-. The assessee also filed Form.67 which was filed on 25.01.2022. An intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act was issued on 28.10.2022 in which

LINEAR DEALERS PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

58,007/-. 3. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the assessment order submitted that the assessee had made suo moto disallowance of Rs.8,335/- and has filed the computation of the said disallowance before the Assessing Officer. However, the ld. Assessing Officer without making any proper investigation firstly observed that no expenses were disallowed

PURULIA CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. ,PURULIA vs. ACIT, CIR. 3, PURULIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

58,24,668.37. and the same deposits/investments are not related to the business activities of the Co-Operative society (herein called the assessee). As the assesee has not shown details/breakup of such interest income, the shown interest income is taken as interest income from surplus fund invested /deposited in banks or in Govt. Securities. Hon’ble Supreme court

VIVEK TIWARI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, SURI, SURI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

58,04,035/- and he also claimed foreign tax credit of Rs. 16,49,094/- u/s 90 of the Act for which he also filed Form-67 on 18/01/2021. Since Form No. 67 was filed on 18/01/2021, i.e. after the due date of filing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the ITA, 1961 i.e. I.T.A. No.: 163/KOL/2025 Assessment

ACIT(IN-SITU), WARD-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRIYASH VYAPAAR PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 702/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (In-Situ),………………………………………...……Appellant Ward-8(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, Room No. 13A, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- Sriyash Vyapaar Private Limited,……..…..Respondent 1002, Poddar Point, 113, Park Street, Kolkata-700016 [Pan:Aaecb3585G] Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 24, 2025 O R D E R

58,100/-. Notice under section 148 was issued on 28.06.2021 on the basis of credible information available on record for reassessment. In this case, notice was issued within the period from 01.04.2021 and 30.06.2021, i.e. within the extended period of time for issue of notice under section 148 in accordance with the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendments

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

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

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

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

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

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

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

reassess the company's income, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the company as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same and on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was correct and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal. Therefore

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore

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

reassess the company's\nincome, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the\ncompany as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same\nand on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was\ncorrect and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal.\nTherefore