BANABIR DASGUPTA,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-50(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per the discussion made

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2579/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2003-04)

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short the Act) dated 30.12.2009. 2. However in this appeal, the assessee has raised a multiple grounds of appeal but at the time of hearing, the main grievance of the assessee has been confined to the Banabir Dasgupta Assessment Year:2003-04 issue of computation of long term capital gain

SATISH KUMAR LAKHMANI,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"ी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. टी. वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

147 of the Act for reopening the assessment that too after satisfying condition precedent given therein. Other than that according to the Ld. AR, the AO was not empowered by law to review his own order and leave alone recommend or put up a proposal to the Ld. Pr. CIT to revise his own order by stating that

THE UNITED PROVINCES SUGAR COMPANY LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

term capital gains and pass a speaking order and determine the balance amount of unabsorbed depreciation amount of unabsorbed depreciation to be carried forward to be carried forward. This, resulted in the capital gains being reduced to Nil. Thus, the computation of inc resulted in the capital gains being reduced to Nil. Thus, the computation of inc resulted

ANJU DARUKA,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1),, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Long Term\nCapital Gain of ₹11,87,522/- in the script of M/s BSR Finance &\nConstruction Ltd. and no other details were mentioned and therefore,\nthe reasons recorded were not sufficient as the AO has not recorded\nhis satisfaction and it is,in fact, a case of borrowed satisfaction. The\ncase of the assessee find support from the decision

DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on the transfer of agro-chemical unit. It is contended that the AO ought to have considered the transfer of undertaking as a going concern for slump price. It is contended that the undertaking is a capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14). It ITA No.850,1021/Kol/07, 2048,2355/Kol/05 & 487 & 507/Kol/06

ICI INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on the transfer of agro-chemical unit. It is contended that the AO ought to have considered the transfer of undertaking as a going concern for slump price. It is contended that the undertaking is a capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14). It ITA No.850,1021/Kol/07, 2048,2355/Kol/05 & 487 & 507/Kol/06

ACIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on the transfer of agro-chemical unit. It is contended that the AO ought to have considered the transfer of undertaking as a going concern for slump price. It is contended that the undertaking is a capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14). It ITA No.850,1021/Kol/07, 2048,2355/Kol/05 & 487 & 507/Kol/06

BISHWA NATH KHARAKIA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-34(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz)] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. No. 1487/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bishwa Nath Kharakia......................................……………………………………………………Appellant 39, Strand Road, Room – 68, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Afopk 1288 D] Vs Ito, Ward – 34(1), Kolkata...................……………………………………………….............Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 19, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23, 2021 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata Dated 26.04.2019 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: “I. That The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Income Tax Officer In Making An Addition Of Rs. 8,30,797/-, As Alleged Cash Credit, In Place Of Treating The Same As Long Term Capital Gain Earned By The Appellant On Sale Of Shares Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The I.T. Act, 1961. The Learned Cit(A) Has Confirmed The Said Addition On The Alleged Ground That The Transactions Looked To Him As Unnatural & Suspicious In Nature. He Should Have Appreciated That The Shares Were In The Demat Account Of The Appellant For More Than 4 (Four) Years & There Was No Specific Adverse Information Against The Appellant From Dit (Inv.) Ii. That The Learned Cit (Appeals) Erred In Confirming An Addition Of Rs. 4154/- U/S 69C Of The I.T. Act As Alleged

long term capital gain by the assessee for this amount. After taking note of the information from DIT (Inv.), the AO in the reasons recorded opines his suspicion in his own words states “moreover, the transactions cannot be considered genuine merely for the reason that they were carried out on 7 I.T.A. No. 1487/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bishwa Nath

SRI KANCHAN KAMAL MUKHOPADHYAY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-20(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos. 587 & 588/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Kanchan Kamal Mukhopadhyay -Vs.- I.T.O., Ward-20(2) Kolkata Kolkata. [Pan : Aanpm 2997 B] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Rip Das, Fca For The Respondent : None Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act was initiated by the AO and 3 A.Yr.2008-09 he by an order dated 27.01.2014 brought to tax a sum of Rs.39,832/- being income not disclosed. 6. The assessee filed an application u/s 154 of the Act in which the assessee pointed out that in the assessment order

ROHIT JALAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2205/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Long Term Capital Gains claim of the assessee in respect of sale of scrip of M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. as exempt u/s. 10(38) of the Act which was held by AO to be bogus and that action of AO was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on appeal of the assessee. Therefore this appeal of assessee before this

P.L. GOENKA HUF,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 29/4, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

gain at I.T.A. No. 412 /Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 P.L. Goenka HUF 2 Rs.3,99,600/-. Reasons were recorded and subsequently re-assessment proceedings were carried out and additions were made in the hands of the assessee. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has challenged the validity of re-opening on the ground that there

ANANDA PAUL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands are allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2007-08 Ananda Paul V/S. Acit, Circle-50, Cf-125, Salt Lake City, Manicktala Civic Centre, Kolkata-64 Uttarpan Complex, Ds- [Pan No.Afkpp 2201 D] 2&3, Kolkata-54 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri S. Dasagupta, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 12-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 20-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxii, Kolkata Dated 05.11.2014. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-50 Kolkata U/S 147/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 30.12.2011 For Assessment Year 2007-08. Shri, S.K. Tulsiyan, Ld. Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee & Shri S. Dasgupta, Ld. Departmental Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Revenue. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1) That On The Fats & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Treating The Re-Assessment Proceeding U/S 143(3)/147 Of The It Act, 1961 As Invalid, Bad In Law, Unjust & Contrary To The Facts & Law. 2) That On The Facts & In Respect To The Circumstances Of Thee Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Assessment Order Passed U/S. 143(3)/147 Of The It Act, 1961 By The Ld. Ao As Proper & Valid Without Considering The

Long Term Capital Gains. 6) Leave to urge such other ground or grounds before or at the time of hearing of appeal”. 2.1 The assessee vide letter dated NIL has filed additional grounds of appeal as detailed below:- “7. That the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXIII, Kolkata in upholding the ord4re passed by the Ld. AO u/s 147/143

SRI UDIT KUMAR DUGAR ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

long term capital gain by the assessee for this amount. After taking note of the information from DIT (Inv.), the AO in the reasons recorded opines his suspicion in his own words states “moreover, the transactions cannot be considered genuine merely for the reason that they were carried out on the Exchange Platform with the involvement of registered broker through

NARAYAN SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

reassessment\nproceedings were not valid and were liable to the quashed.\nIn the case of CIT vs Atul Jain reported in 299 ITR 383 it has been\nheld as follows:\n\"Held dismissing the appeals, that the only information was that the\nassessee had taken a bogus entry of capital gains by paying cash\nalong with some premium for taking

BENGAL STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 11(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2012-13

147/- and A.Y 2011-12 for Rs.14, 47, 247/-. Further, on perusal of assessment record it revealed that Long Term Capital Loss for Rs.14,47,2481- in A.Y 2011-12 was exempted loss. Since, exempted Long Term Capital Loss cannot be carried forward, their setting without current year’s Long Term Capital Gain was not allowable and therefore the same

ITO, WD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NUPUR CARPETS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.436/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.O, Wd-12(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S Nupur Carpets Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, 23C, Ashutosh Chowdhury Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – Avenue, Kolkata – 700 019. 700 019. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aabcn 0170 A (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri Soumyajit Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Respondent By :Shri Sujoy Sen, Advocate. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21/11/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–4, Kolkata In Appeal No.195/Cit(A)-4/Cir- 12/Kol/14-15, Dated 17.12.2015, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.147/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 01.03.2013. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Read As Under: 1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred By Ignoring That The Assessee Kept On Changing As Per Its Own Liberty To Convert Stock-In-Trade To Investment & Vice Versa Year To Year As Per Its Convenience Specially, When The Assessee Failed To Adhere To Any Reasonable Basis & Fails To Apply Any Definite Method Of Categorizing The Income Whereas The Provisions On I.T. Act Are Differently Applicable On Business & On Investment.

147 had been initiated and notice u/s 148 had been issued on the following reasons: “In this case assessment u/s 143(3) was completed on 31.12.2009 determining an income of Rs.53,44,360/- under normal provisions of section115JB. It is seen that in return of income, the assessee company claimed Short Term Capital Gain of Rs.71

I.T.O WD - 1(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORCHID GRIHA NIRMAN, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 2269/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 I.T.O., Ward-1(4) -Vs.- M/S. Orchid Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaco 7148 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Angam Shaiza, Cit For The Respondent : (I) Shri J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Advocate (Ii)Shri S.Jhajharia, Fca (Iii) Shri Sujoy Sen, Advocate

u/s 148 be issued.” The reasons recorded do not refer to the provisions of section 45(3) of the Act and it is not suggested in the recorded reasons that any income chargeable to tax under section 45(3) of the Act had escaped assessment. The assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 cannot be justified upon the basis that income

OMPRAKASH DARUKA,RANIGANJ vs. ITO, WARD 3(1), , ASANSOL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.685/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Omprakash Daruka, Vs Ito, Ward-3(1), Asansol C/O S.N.Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street Kolkata-700001 Pan No. : Acqpd 1122 L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Shankar Naskar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Long Term Capital Gain of ₹11,87,522/- in the script of M/s BSR Finance & Construction Ltd. and no other details were mentioned and therefore, the reasons recorded were not sufficient as the AO has not recorded his satisfaction and it is, in fact, a case of borrowed satisfaction. The case of the assessee find support from the decision