M/S TITAGARH INDUSTRIES LTD. (FORMERLY M/S BHATPARA PAPERS LTD.),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

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

Gains” was assessed and this carry forward was also permitted by the AO u/s. 74 of the Act. 11 Titagarh Industries Ltd.., AY- 20132-13 The foregoing facts, therefore, put beyond any doubt that prior to completion of assessment, the AO had indeed conducted examination of the relevant facts culminating in assessment of short term capital loss incurred on sale

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

Short Term Capital Gains accrued Rs.96,37,85,635 (As discussed in above paras) ii) Share of “Revaluation Profit” Rs.37,03,36,187 (As discussed in above paras) Assesseed Total Income Rs.133,40,62,937” 12. Before CIT(A) the assessee submitted that initiation of re-assessment proceedings u/s 148 of the Act are not valid. It was contended that

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

short term capital gains as per section 50 for the transfer of the agro-chemical undertaking. The appellant contends that the AO erred in not accepting the appellant ‘s computation of 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

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

short term capital gains as per section 50 for the transfer of the agro-chemical undertaking. The appellant contends that the AO erred in not accepting the appellant ‘s computation of 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

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

short term capital gains as per section 50 for the transfer of the agro-chemical undertaking. The appellant contends that the AO erred in not accepting the appellant ‘s computation of 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

SRI BIJAY SHANKAR HALWASIYA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 44(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2353/Kol/2016 & I.T.A. No. 910/Kol/2018 Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2009-10 Shri Bijay Shankar Halwasiya -Vs- Ito, Ward-44(4) , Kolkata [Pan: Aaqph 4752 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

147 / 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 25.03.2015 and 30.03.2015 respectively for the Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2009-10 respectively. both the appeals are taken together and disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. A.Yrs. 2007-08 & 2009-10 ITA No. 2353/Kol/2016 – Asst Year

SRI BIJAY SHANKAR HALWASIYA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 44(4)/ KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2353/Kol/2016 & I.T.A. No. 910/Kol/2018 Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2009-10 Shri Bijay Shankar Halwasiya -Vs- Ito, Ward-44(4) , Kolkata [Pan: Aaqph 4752 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

147 / 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 25.03.2015 and 30.03.2015 respectively for the Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2009-10 respectively. both the appeals are taken together and disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. A.Yrs. 2007-08 & 2009-10 ITA No. 2353/Kol/2016 – Asst Year

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

short term capital gains and from long term capital gains at Rs.33,83,89,890/- and assessed the total income of the assessee under the normal provisions of the Act at Rs.14,23,83,070/-. The Assessing Officer did not compute the book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. He did not consider the issue as to whether book profit

A.C.I.T CIR - 32, KOLKATA vs. SHRI CHANDRAVADAN DESAI, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Chandravadan Desai Income-Tax, Circle-32, Vs 37, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata. Kolkata-700017. (Pan: Afqpd8487F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Amal Sudhir Kamat, Cit Respondent By : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca Date Of Hearing : 12.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.11.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-09, Kolkata Vide Ita No. 183/Cit(A)-9/Cir-32/2017-18/Kol Dated 27.09.2018 Passed Against The Assessment Order By The Acit, Circle-32, Kolkata U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) Dated 28.12.2017. 2. Ground Raised By The Department In The Present Appeal Relates To Treating The Long Term Capital Gains (Ltcg) Of Rs.18,36,88,168/- & Short Term Capital Gain (Stcg) Of Rs.22,898/- As Profits & Gains Of Business.

short-term capital gain. After referring to several Supreme Court judgments for the proposition that every acquisition by a dealer in a particular commodity cannot be presumed as an acquisition for the purpose of his business, the Commissioner (Appeals) delved into the facts and found that the assessee regularly followed the principle of "lower of the cost or market value

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

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

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

reassessment was held to be bad in law.\n21.\nIn case of Deepraj Hospital (P) Ltd. v. ITO, (2018) 65 ITR 663\n(Agra) (Trib.), the Tribunal held: If the re-opening is based on\ninformation received from the investigation dept, the reasons\nmust show that the Assessing Officer independently applied his\nmind to the information and formed

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Short Term Capital Gain and has\nearned ₹11,87,522/- in the script of M/s BSR Finance & Construction\nLtd. The Id. AR then concluded that he has reason to believe that the\nincome the income has escaped assessment.\n010. In our option, the above reasons are not complete as the details of\ntransactions, such as date of transactions, the person

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

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

Short term C.G. 57,941/- The relevant extract of the reply placed on page 10A of the paper book is reproduced below. “the calculation of capital gains is enclosed.” We also note that the assessee has furnished the details of the investment in the form of some chart as evident from the order sheet entry of the AO relating

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

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 Tribunal

SHRI DIPENDRA NATH CHUNDER,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-54(4), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three writ petitions succeed and are allowed and the impugned notices dated 23rd

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2009-10

u/s. 54 has been claimed from the Long Term Capital Gain, resulted from the sale of property on 13.03.2006.The proceed of the sale has been deposited in State Bank of India Capital Gain Scheme and withdrawn on maturity after three years. The assessee did not utilize the proceeds for either purchase or construction of a new property within the period

MANISH PARASRAMPURIA,KOLKATA vs. A.O., NFAC / D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-43, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

Short Term Capital Gain in disguise of transacting In the shares of M/s Sulabh Engineers and Services Ltd. Hence, based on the findings and surrounding circumstances and considering the aspect of human probability in transacting In such a script, the LTCG&STCG claimed by the assessee has been treated as a bogus or Sham transaction which Is nothing