PRAMOD LAKRA DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

Section 69C of the Act is liable to be deleted. XV. FOR THAT the appellant craves indulgence to add, amend, alter and/or modify the Grounds of Appeal on or before the hearing of this appeal.” 2.2 The Revenue has raised the following grounds before the ITAT: “Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well

URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

Section 69C of the Act is liable to be deleted. XV. FOR THAT the appellant craves indulgence to add, amend, alter and/or modify the Grounds of Appeal on or before the hearing of this appeal.” 2.2 The Revenue has raised the following grounds before the ITAT: “Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well

A R UDYOG,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 46(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

69C, which expressly bars the\nallowability of unexplained expenditure. [Para 23]\n■ The assessee relied upon the details of sundry debtors and sundry\ncreditors filed during the original assessment proceedings under Section\n143(3) to contend that the details of purchases have been furnished. These\ndetails were furnished in the course of the original assessment proceedings\nunder section

M/S. AJANTA MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

reassessment proceeding was set aside. The initial view was that failure to issue notice is an irregularity, which is curable when subsequently the law is well settled that it being an inherent defect is not curable. To the same effect are the decisions in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-vs-Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. 383 ITR 448 (Delhi

M/S. AJANTA MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

reassessment proceeding was set aside. The initial view was that failure to issue notice is an irregularity, which is curable when subsequently the law is well settled that it being an inherent defect is not curable. To the same effect are the decisions in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-vs-Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. 383 ITR 448 (Delhi

M/S. AJANTA MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

reassessment proceeding was set aside. The initial view was that failure to issue notice is an irregularity, which is curable when subsequently the law is well settled that it being an inherent defect is not curable. To the same effect are the decisions in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-vs-Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. 383 ITR 448 (Delhi

PARSAN BROTHERS,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 36, , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment was done and the income was enhanced to ₹1.10 Crore against which another appeal was filed, which I.T.A. No.: 795/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Parsan Brothers. is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). This is the 3rd assessment made in which addition has been made under section 69C

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LIMITED, KOLKATA

section 69C of the Act.\nI have taken into consideration the submissions of the appellant,\nalready extracted above and the findings of the AO as well as the\nmaterial placed on record, It is noted that the impugned addition\nemanated from the information available with the Department,\nwhich was gathered during the course of search and seizure\noperation conducted under

ZENOM VYAPAAR PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

reassessment proceeding under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. BECAUSE the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that AO has rightly rejected the request for cross examination of the witness. 4. BECAUSE the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of Rs. 16000/- made

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SAWANSUKHA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, CO of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Sawansukhajewellers Acit, Circle-7(1), Private Limited 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4Th Floor, 9, Camac Street, Vs. Kolkata-700069, Kolkata-700017, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcs2477R Co No. 32/Kol/2024 (Airing Out Of The Ita No. 1615/Kol/2024 For A.Y. 2018-19) Sawansukhajewellers Acit, Circle-7(1), Private Limited 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 4Th Floor, 9, Camac Street, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700017, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kapil Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2025

69C read with section 115BBE. The total income was computed at Rs 31,96,08,034/-, includingthe income as per the original assessment order and the addition of unexplained expenditure. The assessment ITA No. 1615/KOL/2024 & CO 32/KOL/2024 SawansukhaJewellers Private Limited; A.Y. 2018-19 proceedings resulted in the addition of potentially non-genuine purchases to the total income of the assessee

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC - 3(3),, KOLKATA

section 69C of the Act.\nI have taken into consideration the submissions of the appellant,\nalready extracted above and the findings of the AO as well as the\nmaterial placed on record, It is noted that the impugned addition\nemanated from the information available with the Department,\nwhich was gathered during the course of search and seizure\noperation conducted under

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

section 69C of the Act.\nI have taken into consideration the submissions of the appellant,\nalready extracted above and the findings of the AO as well as the\nmaterial placed on record, It is noted that the impugned addition\nemanated from the information available with the Department,\nwhich was gathered during the course of search and seizure\noperation conducted under

ITO, KOLKATA vs. AJIT KUMAR MINDA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and cross objections of the\nassessee are dismissed

reassessment was upheld.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Sec. 147", "Sec. 148", "Sec. 10(38)", "Sec. 68", "Sec. 69C", "Sec. 250", "Sec. 234B

M D DIESEL SPARES,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-47, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.1430/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M D Diesel Spares………..………………………… ........................……Appellant 7/12, Kings Road, Howrah-711101. [Pan: Aakfm7649F] Vs. Ito, Ward-47(2), Kolkata..................…................…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal & Saurabh Gupta, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Prabir Gupta Choudhury, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 26, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 03, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.10.2023 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 In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Addition Of Rs.18,85,520/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 69C Of The Act On Account Of Bogus Purchases. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Firm Is Involved In The Business Of Spare Parts Of The Machinery. The Assessee Firm For The Year Under Consideration Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.45,150/-. The Said Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The

reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted various documents such as bills, VAT returns, purchase inputs etc. The assessee also claimed that the entire payments were made through banking channel. However, in respect of the delivery transport challan, the assessee explained that these were spare parts of the machinery and were delivered to the assessee via ‘Hand Cart’. However, the Assessing Officer

M/S. DIACH CHEMICALS & PIGMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HOWRAH vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), KOLKATA - 2,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.697/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S Diach Chemicals & Pigments Pvt. Ltd.………....Appellant Nh-6, Jaladhulagori Dhulaghar Industrial Park, Howrah-711302. [Pan: Aaccd1101A] Vs. Pcit, Central-2, Kolkata…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 25, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit), Kolkata, Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case The Assessee Fled Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,24,05,910/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act On 23.04.2021 Determining Assessed Income At Rs.4,75,81,150/-. Subsequently, Pursuant To A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Act In The Case Of The Diach Group Conducted On 07.12 2021 & Subsequent Dates, The Assessing Officer Reopened The Case Under Section 147 & Passed A Reassessment Order Dated 28.03 2023. In The Reassessment Order, The Ao Made An Addition Of Rs.96,84,5467/- On Account Of Bogus Purchases Under

reassessment order, the AO made an addition of Rs.96,84,5467/- on account of bogus purchases under I.T.A. No.697/Kol/2025 M/s Diach Chemicals & Pigments Pvt. Ltd section 69C

M/S. SHAKAMBHARI ISPAT & POWER LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), , KOLKATA

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based on\ninvalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.09.2022\n4. Facts in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of\nincome u/s 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration\non 31.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.17,25,39,330/- under normal\nprovision

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

reassessment proceedings making the addition u/s. 69C of the Act on account of bogus purchases from SDPL for the following amount: Assessment Year Amount 2011-12 Rs.2,69,76,121/- 2012-13 Rs.141,55,45,281/- 2013-14 Rs.19,28,62,081/- 5. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed on the legal issues

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

reassessment proceedings making the addition u/s. 69C of the Act on account of bogus purchases from SDPL for the following amount: Assessment Year Amount 2011-12 Rs.2,69,76,121/- 2012-13 Rs.141,55,45,281/- 2013-14 Rs.19,28,62,081/- 5. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed on the legal issues

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

reassessment proceedings making the addition u/s. 69C of the Act on account of bogus purchases from SDPL for the following amount: Assessment Year Amount 2011-12 Rs.2,69,76,121/- 2012-13 Rs.141,55,45,281/- 2013-14 Rs.19,28,62,081/- 5. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed on the legal issues