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

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

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

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

BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, 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

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, 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

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

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, 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

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, 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

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND LEASE FIN 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

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, 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

ACIT, CIRCLE - 25, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. MALA ROY & OTHERS, KOLKATA

In the result, this appeal of the In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case." present case." 4.5. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 4.5. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 4.5. The Hon'ble Bombay High

ACIT, CIRCLE - 25, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. MALA ROY & OTHERS, KOLKATA

In the result, this appeal of the In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case." present case." 4.5. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 4.5. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 4.5. The Hon'ble Bombay High

SRI NEERAJ UMA SHANKAR MURARKA,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD - 35(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

money of the assessee company is actually unexplained income of the assessee company or that it has been informed by the Director of Income company or that it has been informed by the Director of Income company or that it has been informed by the Director of Income-tax (Inv.), New Delhi vide letter dated 16.06.2006 that the assessee company

M/S BHIKSHU AGENCY PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WD-5(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

unexplained. We notice that during the year under consideration the assessee has received share application money against issue of equity shares having face value of Rs. 10/- and security premium of Rs. 240/- and received sum of Rs. 4,07,30,000/- from the following share applicants: S.No. Name, Address & PAN of No. of Share Capital Premium (Rs.) Total

GODAVARI MULTIPURPOSE ARTICLES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee isallowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 4. At the time of hearing, the appellant/assessee objected to reopening by stating that the Ld. AO has neither recorded in the cogent reasons and not brought any tangible material to suggests that escapement of income. He argued that the Ld. CIT(A) had relied merely on the information provided by the Investigation

BHAGWATI DEVELOPERS, BISHNUPUR vs. I.T.O.WARD-26(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2166/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Bhagwati Developers,………………………..…Appellant Chandandaha Bibirhat, P.O. Charashyamdas P.S. Bishnupur, South 24-Parganas-700162 [Pan:Aakfb2520N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-26(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road, Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 21, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 29, 2025 O R D E R

unexplained money. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT and raised the following grounds:- (i) That the Appellate Order dated 29th August, 2024 passed by the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is without jurisdiction, illegal, invalid and bad-in-law and liable to annulled