ABN TOWER & TRANSMISSION PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1519/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Abn Tower & Transmission Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aajcs 4837 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 25.03.2015 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in upholding the addition of Rs 86,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act in the facts

ITO, WARD-46(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ANUPAM NANDI, HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri Aby T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.774/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2007-08 I.T.O., Ward-46(1) -Vs.- Shri Anupam Nandi Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Abipn 4303 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Md.Ghayas Uddin, Jcit,Sr.Dr For The Respondent : Shri Miraj D.Shah, Ar

183 gms and Rs.5,14 ,897/- was lended by the assessee, which matches with the figures shown in the balance sheet as on 31.03.1999 at page 22 of the paper book. Thus we note that the pawned jewellery stock of 31,183gms as on 31.3.1999 was reduced to approx 28 kgms as noted by AO as on 31.3.2007 pursuant

DCIT, CC-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. P & P HIGHRISE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

section 68 is not sustainable. The assessee has drew the attention of the ld. CIT(Appeals) towards the material submitted by it. A paper book running into 202 pages containing the material filed before the authorities below has been filed before us. For making reference about the nature of material, we would deem it appropriate to take note

M/S SATYAM SMELTERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA

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]

68 of the Act as undisclosed cash credit. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who was pleased to confirm the action of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Aggrieved, the assessee is before us. 4. The Ld. AR assailing the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) contended that the assessee company

ACIT,CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TRAXPO ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

section 68 of the Act would not arise. It was also argued before the Learned CIT(A) that certain debit balances of sundry creditors were also added by the Learned AO as bogus liabilities which were pointed out before the Learned CIT(A) by the assessee. It was also argued that with regard to the addition

SAVERA COMMOTRADE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 5(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

68 of the Act was rightly ordered\nto be deleted.\nPage 7\nITA No. 1719/KOL/2025\nSavera Commotrade Private Limited; A.Y. 2009-10\nFor the above reasons, we find no ground to interfere with the order passed by the\nlearned Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. The substantial\nquestions of law are answered against the revenue.\"\n5.5

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VIGHNAHARTA VINCOM PRIVATE LIMITED, KARNATAKA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Vighnharta Vincom Private Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1) Limited 5Th Floor, Room No. 5/12/2B, 94-G, Apartments No.1, 9 Th Cross Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, P-7, Road, Rajamahalvilas Extension Vs. Chowringhee Square, Sadashiva Nagar, Bangalore, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Karnataka-560080, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcv6413E Assessee By : Shri S.K. Pransukha, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.04.2026

Section 68 of the Act of 1961 was offered by the assessee particularly in the factual matrix of the present case. 20. In such circumstances, we do not find any substantial question of law involved for the purpose of consideration by this Court as contended on behalf of the appellant.” We also rely on the decision

ADITI MITRA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 37(3), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 25/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Aditi Mitra,…………………………………...……Appellant Flat No. 401, Block No. 12, Ujaas, The Condoville, 69, S.K. Deb Road, Kolkata-700048, West Bengal [Pan:Aczpb6415H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-37(3), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001

section 183 of the Finance Act, 2016 in respect of the Income Declaration Scheme 2016 disclosing the Long-Term Capital Gain on sale of Investment of Share of Blue Print Securities Ltd of Rs.14,84,830 and paid tax of Rs.6,68

MUNDHRA CONSTRUCTION P LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-10(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68 of the Act for which he placed I.T.A. No. 807/Kol/2024 Mundhra Construction Pvt. Ltd. reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) wherein it was held as under: "In this case the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors

DY. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. FEMINA STOCK MANAGEMENT COMPANY LTD, KOLKATA

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 850/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Cit Central Circle – 1(4), Kolkata Femina Stock Management Company Vs Ltd. 5Th Floor, Room No. 2 P23/24, Radha Bazar Street Tea Board Kolkata - 700001 [Pan: Aaacf3689H] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/10/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata – 21, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 12/05/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 36 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Revenue. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record Explaining The Reasons. On Perusing The Same, We Are Convinced That The Revenue Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing This Appeal In Time. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

section 68 of the Act, for the impugned transactions in relation to the particular company present on those premises. These documents have already been elaborately listed earlier in this order, and included the PAN Card, IT acknowledgement, audited balance sheets and so on. It was also pointed out in the 1st remand report that the inspector did not find

JASHOJIT MUKHERJEE,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 403/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jashojit Mukherjee -Vs- Acit, Circle-50, Kolkata [Pan: Afapm 7208 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 are satisfied. 12. As far as applicability of section 41(1) of the Act is concerned, the question before us is limited to the applicability of Section 41(1) of the Act. The section insofar as it is relevant for our purpose is as below: "Profits chargeable to tax. 41. (1) Where an allowance or deduction

LIFE STYLE FOUNDATION PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

section 68 may kindly be dropped and appeal of the Appellant be allowed.” 1.1. In light of additional evidences filed, the original grounds of appeal are not specifically adjudicated. It is also seen from the records that the appellant had earlier moved a petition for transfer of appeal to an appropriate Assessing Officer in Chennai as the registered office

KIPPY ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

68 of the Act on account of unexplained income/ credit of\n₹2,00,00,000/-.\n4. In the appellate proceedings, the Id. CIT (A) dismissed the legal issue\nof invalid reopening of assessment u/s 147 read with section 148 of\nthe Act thereby upholding the re-opening of assessment.\n5. The Id. AR vehemently submitted before us that

GREENEARTH RESOURCES AND PROJECTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2128/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Greenearth Resources & Projects Ltd………………....Appellant Room No.866, Todi Corner, 8Th Floor, 32, Erza Street, Kol-1. [Pan: Aabcn1393B] Vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Kolkata….…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. N. Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Dated 19.07.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 32 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons Or Such Delay. After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Said Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

183/- under the head “Income from other sources” as per Form 26AS; ₹96,253/- being interest income shown in Form 26AS but not declared in return; ₹22,27,01,242/- shown as unsecured loans in the balance sheet, treated as unexplained under section 68

A AND M HOME SOLUTION PRIVATE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WD-7(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose subject to above directions

section 68 to subsequent year income by\nclaiming them as unexplained.\n4. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or modify the ground of appeal\nany time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”\n4. We find from the appeal record that this appeal of the assessee has\nbeen fixed several times earlier

DCIT,CC-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CHAMAN METALICS LTD. , MAHARASHTRA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garganddr. Manish Borad

68 of the I.T.A No.610/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2007-08 M/s ChamanMetallics Ltd I.T.Act, 1961 without going into merits of the case and the facts thatcreditworthiness of the share applicants could not be proven as therewas no rational of the fund received by share applicants and in turntransferred the fund in the form of share application money to theassessee company

PINKY AGARWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

68 of the Act but without going into the merits of the case even on legal ground itself, we, in view settled judicial procedure referred hereinabove, are inclined to hold that there is a violation of principles of natural justice as opportunity of cross- examination of all those persons whose statements though not directly referred to the alleged transactions

M/S. GATEWAY FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

68 of the Act but without going into the merits of the case even on legal ground itself, we, in view settled judicial procedure referred hereinabove, are inclined to hold that there is a violation of principles of natural justice as opportunity of cross- examination of all those persons whose statements though not directly referred to the alleged transactions