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

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

RAGHUVIR RETAILERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Pcit-2 Raghuvir Retailers Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan P-7, Mandawa Shikhar, 151, Sarat Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Bose Road, Kolkata-700026, Vs. 700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaecr8231M Assessee By : Shri S.M. Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.02.2024

reassess the income ofthe petitioner. Consequently, the notice dated 02.04.2022 u/s.148 of the Act issued to the petitioner being invalid and sought to be issued after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year 2015-16 with which we are concerned in this petition, any steps taken by the respondents in furtherance of notice dated 21.03.2022 issued under

ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S BPO FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.99/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata……..........................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Bpo Finance & Investments Pvt. Ltd. .……........……..…..…..Respondent R No.54,5/1, Clive Row (2Nd Floor), Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aaccb5328F] Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 15, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 04, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 10.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Revenue Originally Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld, Cit(A) Was Justified In The Quashing The Addition Of Rs. 1,85,000,00/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Share Capital & Premium In The Course Assessment In Absence Of Identity Of The Creditors, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Entire Transactions. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld, Cit(A) Was Justified In The Quashing The Addition Of Rs. 1,85,00,000/-Made By The Assessing Officer Where No Personal Attendance Was Made By Any Director Of The Share Allottee Companies During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings & As Such Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Creditors & Genuineness Of Transactions Could Not Be Verified.

section 68 of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. Rs. 13,56,097/- u/s. 14A of the Act, denying the findings of the Assessing Officer. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOMANI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules. Thereafter, another order was passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act, dated 31.12.2018, through which an addition of Rs. 5,60,00,000/- was made u/s the assessee. Following this order, there was another order dated 27.11.2019 passed again u/s 147/143(3) of the Act. Through this last

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOMANI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules. Thereafter, another order was passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act, dated 31.12.2018, through which an addition of Rs. 5,60,00,000/- was made u/s the assessee. Following this order, there was another order dated 27.11.2019 passed again u/s 147/143(3) of the Act. Through this last

RAKESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DURGAPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-1, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (Kz) & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Jm ]

reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w. section 147, neither suggests that any such enquiry on the proposed disallowance u/s 14A of the Act as raised

SHEBRO MARKETING ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 40, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2013-

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

reassess undersection 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee undersection 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.]” 8. Now, from perusal of sub-Section (2) of Section 14A of the Act, we find that the precondition

SHEBRO MARKETING ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 40, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2013-

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

reassess undersection 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee undersection 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.]” 8. Now, from perusal of sub-Section (2) of Section 14A of the Act, we find that the precondition

SHEBRO MARKETING ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 40, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2013-

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

reassess undersection 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee undersection 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.]” 8. Now, from perusal of sub-Section (2) of Section 14A of the Act, we find that the precondition

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

u/s 14A of the Act and the provisions of Section 14A of the Act, read as follows:- “14A. 62[(1)] 63[Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, for the purposes of] computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred64 by the assessee in relation to64 income which does

M/S. OSIAN STOCK BROKING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD- 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 408/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Osian Stock Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), C/O S M Surana Advocate Kolkata Vs Unit No. 1501 15Th Floor Diamond Heritage 16, Strand Road Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaaco3479N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Fca Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30/01/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is The Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 13/06/2022 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Has Assailed The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) On Legal Issue As Well As On Merit As Raised In The Concise Grounds Of Appeal Filed By The Assessee Which Are Reproduced Below: “1. For That The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Not Properly Appreciating The Facts & Disposing The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee. 2. For That The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Ao Has Taken Into Consideration All Legal Steps Before Initiating Action U/S 147 When The Reopening Of Assessment Was Not In Accordance With Law.

14A r.w.r 8D on account of expenditure for earning exempt income of Rs.1,59,482/-. Finally assessment u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act was framed determining total income of assessee at Rs.55,69,030/- 5. The Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that AO, after due application of mind to the information available

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ICA EDUSKILL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

14A read with Rule 8D of the Act. Thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act on the ground that authorised share capital as per Schedule 1 of the Balance-sheet has increased from Rs.1.64 crores to Rs.4.98 crores and the assessee has also claimed an amount of Rs.31,72,758/- under section

M/S MERLINS,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CILCLE-31, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz)] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. No. 1999/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Merlins......................................…………………………..................................................Appellant 22, Prince Anwar Shah Road, Kolkata – 700 033. [Pan: Aatfm 9672 P] Vs Acit, Circle – 31, Kolkata...................…………………………………………………..............Respondent Kolkata. Appearances By: Shri Rakesh Jain, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 13, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 23, 2021 Order

14A read with Rule 8D Rs. 2,25,121/-.” 3. Against the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the validity of the assessment made by the AO as well as disputing both the additions made on merit. During the course

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

147 read with Section 143(3) of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.31,926/-. This assessment order u/s 147/143(3) of the Act was examined by ld. Pr. CIT invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the Act and in the order u/s 263 dt. 26/03/2013, ld. Assessing Officer was directed to carry

ARTEX PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-4(3),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and need to be quashed. 2. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of a sum of ₹52,68,500/- made by the AO @1% of the share capital of ₹52,68,50,000/- raised by the assessee