M/S SALARPURIA PROPERTIES PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CC-3(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee as well as of the revenue are dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2005-06 Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., C/O, M/S. Salarpuria Income-Tax, Circle- 1, Jajodia & Co., 3Rd Floor, 7, Vs. Kolkata. Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700072. (Pan: Aagcs8492P) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Commissioner Of Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle- Ltd., 3(2), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.3/Kol/2023 In Ita No.736/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd., Income-Tax, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

147 are as below: "In continuation of a search & seizure operation in the case of Sri P. Dayananda Pai, a survey was conducted in the Office premises of M/s. Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd. at 4th & 5th floor, Salarpuria Windsor No.3, Ulsoor Road, Bangalore on 27.6.2011. M/s. Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd. is engaged in the business of real estate. Sri Bijay

CEEBUILD COMPANY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Agarwal]

Section 147 of the Act being not fulfilled, the AO lacks jurisdiction to reopen the scrutinized assessment of assessee for Ceebuild Company Pvt. Ltd., AY 2010-11 AY 2010-11. For this legal proposition, the Ld. A.R. cited the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Sound Casting Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT reported

ALANKAR COMMODEAL (P) LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1257/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Alankar Commodeal (P) Ltd..........................................…………………….……Appellant C/O Ca Bal Kishan Kedia, Bansal Complex, 1St Floor, Ram Nivas Talkies Chowk, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh-496001. [Pan: Aahca1771G] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata…………….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Kr. Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 16, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 01, 2022 Hearing Through Video Conferencing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.04.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act(Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Passing Order Ex-Parte. 2. That Under The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Bad In Law & Hence The Consequential Reassessment Order Is Also Illegal & Needs To Be Annulled. 3. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of A Sum Of Rs.2,50,50,000/- For The Share Capital Raised By The Assessee, Holding The Same To Be Unexplained Cash-Credit In Terms Of Sec.68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Addition Is Unjustified & Need To Be Deleted. 4. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Amend Or Withdraw Any Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

reassessment order is also illegal and needs to be annulled. 3. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of a sum of Rs.2,50,50,000/- for the share capital raised by the assessee, holding the same to be unexplained cash-credit in terms of sec.68 of the Income

DIPAK KUMAR DASBHOWMIK,PASCHIM MIDNAPORE vs. I.T.O., WARD - 38(1), MIDNAPORE , PASCHIM MIDNAPORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

189 ITR 285 wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the word 'reason' in the phrase 'reason to believe' will mean cause or justification, and, if the AO had cause or justification to know or suppose that income has escaped assessment, he can be said to have reason to believe that an income has escaped assessment

NEHA DIWAN,HINDMOTOR vs. ITO WARD - 23(1), HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment was initiated based on alleged information that the appellant received accommodation entries of ₹91,00,000 from M/s Shree Shyam Trading Company (Prop. Satya Narayan More, PAN: CRHPM0358P). The appellant submitted complete documentation including ledger, sale invoices, confirmations, and bank statements to prove the genuineness of the transactions. 4. That, without prejudice, the assessment order dated 31st March

M/S. BMS SALES PVT. LTD., ,PURULIA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment u/s.147 of the Act based\non an invalid notice issued by the AO u/s.148 of the Act dated\n15.01.2024.\n2.1. 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\nconsideration on 31.10.2019 declaring total income of\nRs.17,25,39,330/- under normal provision

GARUD CREDIT & HOLDING PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Garud Credit & Holding Pvt. Limited,.........Appellant D.J. Shah & Co., 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Aaacg9791P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 O R D E R

147 of the Act. The reasons for reopening was on account of preliminary expenses written off under section 35D of the Act as well as higher amount of expenses claimed by the assessee during the year as compared to the preceding year. The ld. Assessing Officer noticed that during the year, there is a transaction of share capital and share

SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 12, KOLKATA

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

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

147 of I.T. Act, 1961 on the basis of information received from DGIT(Inv), Mumbai through DIT(Inv), Kolkata that the assessee during the Financial Year 2008-09 had purchased entries of bogus purchase amounting to Rs. 4,43,18,698/- from Hawala Dealers. However, the assessment was completed by making partial disallowance

SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 12, KOLKATA

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

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

147 of I.T. Act, 1961 on the basis of information received from DGIT(Inv), Mumbai through DIT(Inv), Kolkata that the assessee during the Financial Year 2008-09 had purchased entries of bogus purchase amounting to Rs. 4,43,18,698/- from Hawala Dealers. However, the assessment was completed by making partial disallowance

SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 12, KOLKATA

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

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

147 of I.T. Act, 1961 on the basis of information received from DGIT(Inv), Mumbai through DIT(Inv), Kolkata that the assessee during the Financial Year 2008-09 had purchased entries of bogus purchase amounting to Rs. 4,43,18,698/- from Hawala Dealers. However, the assessment was completed by making partial disallowance

ACIT, CIR. 2(1), JALPAIGURI vs. SHRI BHOLANATH AGARWAL, COOCHBEHAR

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for AY 2011-12 and sample bank statements of bank accounts held with ICICI Bank. 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The Revenue is aggrieved with the relief granted by ld. CIT(A). 9. Ground nos. 1, 2 & 4 relate to addition made for undisclosed stock

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

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KARAN POLYMERS(P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

189 (Del). On the other hand, the Ld. AR supported the action of Ld. CIT(A) and relied on the following decisions to support the impugned order: i) DCIT Vs. Great Wall Marketing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 660/Kol/2011 dated 03.02.2016, ii) ITO Vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in 103 ITR 437, iii) S. P. Agarwalla Vs. ITO reported

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KARAN POLYMERS(P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

189 (Del). On the other hand, the Ld. AR supported the action of Ld. CIT(A) and relied on the following decisions to support the impugned order: i) DCIT Vs. Great Wall Marketing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 660/Kol/2011 dated 03.02.2016, ii) ITO Vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in 103 ITR 437, iii) S. P. Agarwalla Vs. ITO reported

CHANDRA BROS.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 37(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

u/s 143(1) by the CPC Unit, Bangaluru. The CPC. However, while determining the Total Income, the CPC had added a sum of Rs. 11467010/- to the Returned Income of Rs 928672.00 (PB-1) so as arrive at the Total Income of Rs.12395680.00 (vide CPC, Sl. No 14/17). Consequent upon such higher reckoning of Total Income, there had arisen

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

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

reassess the company's income, then it would have stated in section 115J that 'income of the company as accepted by the Assessing Officer'. In the absence of the same and on the language of section 115J, the view taken by the Tribunal was correct and the High Court had erred in reversing the said view of Tribunal. Therefore