ACIT, CIRCLE - 3, ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. M/S. SANJAY TRANSPORT AGENCY, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

68 of the Act in the absence of creditworthiness of these parties and made addition. We find no reason to sustain the same, as the very basis is not doubted by the AO, and assessee has discharged its onus by filing all the details before the AO. Accordingly, we confirm the order of CIT(A) and this issue of revenue

KUNDU BROTHERS,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, SILIGURI, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

194A. Respectfully following the said decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, I hold that the assessee was not liable to deduct tax at source from the interest paid on the delayed payments to trade creditors and the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) under section

SUNDIP KUMAR GUPTA. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-47,KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.1170 To1173/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sundip Kumar Gupta..…………………....................…...……………....Appellant Fort Oasis Complex, Flat No.040903, Block-436B, Panditya Road, Kolkata – 700029. [Pan: Aebpg7187B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-47, Kolkata…….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhishek Bansal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri B. K. Singh, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 02, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Bunch Of Four Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 06.09.2023, 06.09.2023, 15.09.2023 & 06.09.2023, Respectively, Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since The Facts & Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, Hence, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. At The Request Of Ld. Representatives Of The Parties, Ita No.1170/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts.

Section 68 of the Act. We, thus, set aside the finding of ld. CIT(A) and delete the addition of Rs.25,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act.” 8. The aforesaid decisions referred to by the Tribunal is squarely applicable to the facts and issues involved in this case. In view of our discussion made above

SUNDIP KUMAR GUPTA. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-47, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.1170 To1173/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sundip Kumar Gupta..…………………....................…...……………....Appellant Fort Oasis Complex, Flat No.040903, Block-436B, Panditya Road, Kolkata – 700029. [Pan: Aebpg7187B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-47, Kolkata…….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhishek Bansal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri B. K. Singh, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 02, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Bunch Of Four Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 06.09.2023, 06.09.2023, 15.09.2023 & 06.09.2023, Respectively, Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since The Facts & Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, Hence, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. At The Request Of Ld. Representatives Of The Parties, Ita No.1170/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts.

Section 68 of the Act. We, thus, set aside the finding of ld. CIT(A) and delete the addition of Rs.25,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act.” 8. The aforesaid decisions referred to by the Tribunal is squarely applicable to the facts and issues involved in this case. In view of our discussion made above

SUNDIP KUMAR GUPTA. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-47, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.1170 To1173/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sundip Kumar Gupta..…………………....................…...……………....Appellant Fort Oasis Complex, Flat No.040903, Block-436B, Panditya Road, Kolkata – 700029. [Pan: Aebpg7187B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-47, Kolkata…….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhishek Bansal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri B. K. Singh, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 02, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Bunch Of Four Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 06.09.2023, 06.09.2023, 15.09.2023 & 06.09.2023, Respectively, Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since The Facts & Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, Hence, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. At The Request Of Ld. Representatives Of The Parties, Ita No.1170/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts.

Section 68 of the Act. We, thus, set aside the finding of ld. CIT(A) and delete the addition of Rs.25,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act.” 8. The aforesaid decisions referred to by the Tribunal is squarely applicable to the facts and issues involved in this case. In view of our discussion made above

SUNDIP KUMAR GUPTA. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-47, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

Appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.1170 To1173/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sundip Kumar Gupta..…………………....................…...……………....Appellant Fort Oasis Complex, Flat No.040903, Block-436B, Panditya Road, Kolkata – 700029. [Pan: Aebpg7187B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-47, Kolkata…….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhishek Bansal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri B. K. Singh, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 02, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Bunch Of Four Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 06.09.2023, 06.09.2023, 15.09.2023 & 06.09.2023, Respectively, Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since The Facts & Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, Hence, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. At The Request Of Ld. Representatives Of The Parties, Ita No.1170/Kol/2023 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts.

Section 68 of the Act. We, thus, set aside the finding of ld. CIT(A) and delete the addition of Rs.25,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act.” 8. The aforesaid decisions referred to by the Tribunal is squarely applicable to the facts and issues involved in this case. In view of our discussion made above

ITO, WD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Ito(E), Wd-1(3), Kolkata Vs. The Institute Of Indian Foundrymen 6Th Floor, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata Iif Center, 335, Rajdanga Main – 700 071. Road, East Kolkata Township, P.O. Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatt 6606 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

194A [Interest other than ‘interest on securities’] and, u/s 194C [payments to contractors]. We note that the difference arises because of timing of the transactions, which is the common issue in TDS matters. The relevant comparative facts and figures are given below: As per form 26AS As per assessee Difference Income 3

SRI HARTAJ SEWA SINGH,KOLKATA vs. DCIT(IT), CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13

68, 97, 141, 165, 166, 193 and 241 of the paper book. The relevant extract is reproduced as under:- “ HARTAJ SEWA SINGH MEWS III, TIVOLI COURT, 1C BALLYGUNGE CIRCULAR ROAD KOLKATA-70019 Ref: No.: IT/HSS/03/2014-15 Date:20.08.2014 To DDIT(IT)-1(1) Aayakar Bhawan Poorva 110, Shanti Pally Kolakata-700 017 Dear Madam, Ref; PAN No.ABHPS9122R Sub: Documents

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CHAMPION COMMERCIAL CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Dcit, Circle-10(1), V/S. M/S Champion P-7, Chowringhee Commercial Co. Ltd., Square, 3Rd Floor, P-15, Cit Road, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-73 [Pan No.Aabcc 2373 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 26-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 04.04.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 10.02.2016 For Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “I. That On The Facts Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,50,938/- On A Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 37(1) Overrule The Judicial Pronouncement Of Cit Vs. Calcutta Agency Limited (1951) (191) Itr (Sc) Ii. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.13,91,404/- On A Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 37 Of The It Act, 1961. Iii. That On The Facts Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.20,25,329/- On Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The

194A. vi. That on the facts of the case Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.8,28,655/- on a wrong appreciation of facts ignoring the provisions laid down in section 194J in the It Act, 1961. vii. That the appellant craves to add, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal before

RAJESH PAGARIA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WD-48(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 464/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Rajesh Pagaria................................…………………………………………………………………Appellant 14, Watkins Lane, Gokul Apartment, Howrah – 711 101 [Pan: Aftpp 9012 M] I.T.O. Ward 48(2) Kolkata,...................……………………………………………...............Respondent 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata – 700 001 Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 22, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 11, 2018

68 of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the said addition. 4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides on this issue and also perused the relevant material available on record. The learned counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the relevant details furnished at page no 5 and 7 of the Paper

BIBHUTI BHUSHAN DAS ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 25(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं/I.T.A No.237/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Bibhuti Bhushan Das Vs. Ito, Ward-25(3), Kolkata. P-42, Block-A, Shatabdi Park, Mukundpur, Kolkata – 700099. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aidpd4689B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 7, Kolkata’S Order Dated 25.02.2019 Passed In Case No.36/Cit(A)-7/Kol/Ward-25(3)/16-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. Case File Suggests That Rpad Notice Dated 29.11.2019 Stand Returned Unserved. We Therefore Proceed Ex Parte. 2. The Assessee Raises The Following Three Substantive Grounds In The Instant Appeal:

3. We now advert the assessee’s first substantive grievance challenges correctness of both the lower authorities’ action making section 68 addition of Rs.61,78,180/-. The CIT(A)’s detailed discussion to this effect reads as under: “Ground No.2: I have gone through the assessment order as well as the submission of the Ld. A/R. The assessee

M/S STANDARD FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.7(2), KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

3. The facts in brief are that during the course of assessment proceedings the AO observed that the assessee has charged a sum of Rs. 82,56,935/- under the head finance cost for delayed payments and accordingly called upon the assessee to furnish the details thereof. It was submitted before the AO that whenever the shares are purchased from

DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE 2(3), KOLKATA vs. LUMINO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MERLIN ACROPOLIS, E.K.T.

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1223/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Kolkata........................…...........................……….……Appellant Vs. Lumino Industries Ltd……………………............…..….…..….......……...…..…..Respondent Unit No.12/4, Merlin Acropolis, E.K.T., Kol-700107. [Pan: Aaacd9817H] C.O No.57/Kol/2025 (In I.T.A. No.1223/Kol/2025) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Lumino Industries Ltd.......................................................................……….…Cross-Objector Unit No.12/4, Merlin Acropolis, E.K.T., Kol-700107. [Pan: Aaacd9817H] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Kolkata ……………….…..….......……..…...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. N. Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 16, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue & Cross Objections D By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) – 26, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 27.03.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Ay 2014-15. 02. At The Outset, We Note That There Is A Delay In Filing Of The Appeal By 7 Days By The Revenue, For Which, Condonation Petition Has Been Filed. After Hearing Both The Parties & Perusing The Contents Of The Condonation Application Filed By The Revenue, We Are Of The View That The

68 of the Act. Fortunately, for the assessee, CIT(A) has done an elaborate factual exercise, took into consideration, the creditworthiness of the 13 companies the details of which were furnished by the assessee. More importantly, the CIT noted that all these companies responded to the notices issued under section 133 (6) of the Act which fact

ACIT, CIRCLE - 25, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. SMT. CHAMPA NANDI, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Acit, Circle-25, Kolkata Vs. Smt. Champa Nandi 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhawan Dakshin, 2, Flat No.Ud-0606, Udita Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata – 700 068. Complex, 1050/1, Survey Park, E.M. Byepass, Kolkata – 700 075. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abqpn 6470 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

68,40,472/- under the head interest and finance charges. On perusal of the same it was noted by assessing officer that the following amounts were payable/paid to different non-banking financial companies and no tax has been deducted at source under section 194A of the Act: Sl. No. Name of Lenders & address Interest amounts (in Rs.) 1 Tata

CITYSTAR GANGULY PROJECTS LLP,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 9, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm ]

194A of Rs.46,407/-. On these facts we note that the information gathered u/s 133(6) substantiated the creditworthiness of the loan creditor. It is further observed that M/s Hotahoti Wood Products Ltd is an associate company of the assessee because its Designated Partner, Shri C R Modi is also the Director on the Board of the loan creditor

SHRI KISHAN SARAF,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 45, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue, on this issue, is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2265/Kol/2014 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. A.C.I.T, Cir-45, Kolkata. Shri Kishan Saraf Krishna Building, Room No.817, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata – 224, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – 700 001. 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Akups4979 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.27/Kol/2015 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 A.C.I.T, Cir-45, Kolkata. Vs. Shri Kishan Saraf Krishna Building, Room No.817, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata 224, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – – 700 001. 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Akups 4979 C (Revenue) .. (Assessee) Assesseeby : Shri S.D Varma, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Acit, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Cross-Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Are Directed Against An Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, Kolkata In Appeal No.238/Cit(A)- Xxx/Cir-45/2013-14, Dated 29.10.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed

section 143(3)/263/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), dated 31.01.2014. 2. Since these two cross-appeals relate to same assessee, same Assessment Year, identical issues involved, therefore, these have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3

ACIT, CIRCLE-45, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI KISHAN SARAF, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue, on this issue, is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2265/Kol/2014 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. A.C.I.T, Cir-45, Kolkata. Shri Kishan Saraf Krishna Building, Room No.817, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata – 224, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – 700 001. 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Akups4979 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.27/Kol/2015 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 A.C.I.T, Cir-45, Kolkata. Vs. Shri Kishan Saraf Krishna Building, Room No.817, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata 224, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – – 700 001. 700 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Akups 4979 C (Revenue) .. (Assessee) Assesseeby : Shri S.D Varma, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Acit, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Cross-Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Are Directed Against An Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, Kolkata In Appeal No.238/Cit(A)- Xxx/Cir-45/2013-14, Dated 29.10.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed

section 143(3)/263/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), dated 31.01.2014. 2. Since these two cross-appeals relate to same assessee, same Assessment Year, identical issues involved, therefore, these have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3

SRI TUTUL CHOWDHURY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2328/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sri Tultul Chowdhury -Vs.- A.C.I.T/D.C.I.T., Circle-50, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aeppc 0271 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.M.Surana, Advocate For The Respondent : None Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) dated 04.03.2015 for the Asst Year 2012-13. 2. The first issue to be decided in this appeal of the assessee is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in upholding the addition made