NEZONE TUBES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 13. That the appellant craves to leave, add, amend or 13 adduce any of the grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings.” A. We shall first take up ITA No. 179/KOL/2025 for AY 2011-12 for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that

NEZONE TUBES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 13. That the appellant craves to leave, add, amend or 13 adduce any of the grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings.” A. We shall first take up ITA No. 179/KOL/2025 for AY 2011-12 for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that

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

BALAKA VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

cash credit u/s 68 merely on the basis of the surmise and conjecture. The AO further doubted the valuation of the premium without appreciating the fact that the law existing in AY 6 I.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. 2008-09 did not require any kind of valuation in such respect. The relevant

BALAKA VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

cash credit u/s 68 merely on the basis of the surmise and conjecture. The AO further doubted the valuation of the premium without appreciating the fact that the law existing in AY 6 I.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. 2008-09 did not require any kind of valuation in such respect. The relevant

DCIT, C.C.-3(4), KOLKATA vs. M/S TANISHQUE TRADE LINK PVT. LTD, HOWRAH

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 17/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tanishque Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata Vs Bhabatarini Apartment G.T. Road, Room No. 602 Howrah - 711201 [Pan : Aacct7512R] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/01/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 24/09/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Allowing The Bogus Share Capital Raised In The Books Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Failed To Discharge Its Primary Onus To Prove & Establish The Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Investor Companies & Genuineness Of The Transaction. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Ignoring That The Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Shareholders & Even The Genuineness Of The Transactions Remained Unexplained. 3. That On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Invoking His Powers U/S. 250(4) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 In Directing The Assessing Officer To Make Further Enquiry & Report The Results Of The

cash credit merely disbelieving evidence adduced and without bringing any adverse material on record. The ld. CIT(A) after going through the details filed by the assessee came to a conclusion that whatever details the ld. Assessing Officer has called from the Assessing Officer has been duly supplied and ld. Assessing Officer had carried out the assessment proceedings

SATABDI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 10(2),, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Shri Satabdi Developers Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward 10(2) Ruby House, 8, India Exchange Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, Place, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700001, 110, Shanti Pally, Vs. West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aakcs8130L Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan& Ms. Lata Goyal, Ars Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

unexplained investment or cash credit for its relevant assessment year 1993-94 5. It does not require any elaborate argument that a carried forward amount of the previous year does not become an investment or cash credit generated during the relevant year 1993-94. This alone is sufficient to sustain the order of the Tribunal in deleting the amount

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

cash credit on the ground that the assessee could not prove the creditworthiness of M/s Quality Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. and the genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, treated the same as sham transaction despite the assessee filing all the evidences before the AO. 04. The Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings, allowed the appeal of the assessee after taking into

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

cash credit on the ground that the assessee could not prove the creditworthiness of M/s Quality Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. and the genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, treated the same as sham transaction despite the assessee filing all the evidences before the AO. 04. The Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings, allowed the appeal of the assessee after taking into

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

cash credit on the ground that the assessee could not prove the creditworthiness of M/s Quality Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. and the genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, treated the same as sham transaction despite the assessee filing all the evidences before the AO. 04. The Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings, allowed the appeal of the assessee after taking into

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: the AO.

cash credit on the ground that the assessee could not prove the creditworthiness of M/s Quality Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. and the genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, treated the same as sham transaction despite the assessee filing all the evidences before the AO. 04. The Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings, allowed the appeal of the assessee after taking into

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

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

ARYAN PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 2(1),, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Aryan Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Cc-2(1), Ruby House, 8, India Exchange Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, Place, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700001, 110, Shantipally, Vs. West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aagca2975B Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan& Ms. Lata Goyal, Ars Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

unexplained investment or cash credit for its relevant assessment year 1993-94 5. It does not require any elaborate argument that a carried forward amount of the previous year does not become an investment or cash credit generated during the relevant year 1993-94. This alone is sufficient to sustain the order of the Tribunal in deleting the amount

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

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

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

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