MANAS KUMAR NAGURI,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XIII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 68 of the Act and has also rightly applied the combined peak credit theory after considering all the entries in the undisclosed bank accounts. The reliance is placed on the decision in the case of ITO, Ward 36(4), Kolkata vs. Uday Shankar Mahawar, ITA No.1903/KoI/2009, CIT vs. Praveen Kumar Agarwal, IT (SS) A No.61 & 74/Ko1/2003

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

234A and 234B of the Act which is not chargeable and/or excessively charged. I.T.A. No.: 630/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Neha Diwan. 15. That the Ld. Assessing Officer arbitrarily initiated penalty proceeding under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 16. That the Ld. Assessing Officer arbitrarily initiated penalty proceeding under section

ITO WD-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SAPPHIRE GLOBAL FINANCE (P) LTD, KOLKATA

68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 133(6) of the Income-tax Act", "Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act", "Section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act", "Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act", "Section 234A

MANISH KUMAR BAID,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIRCLE 35, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1236/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Manish Kumar Baid -Vs- Acit, Cir-35, Kolkata [Pan: Ahmpb 3024 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1237/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mahendra Kumar Baid -Vs- Acit, Cir-35, Kolkata [Pan: Aejpb 7691 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 of the Act in respect of sale proceeds of shares of Kailash Auto Finance Limited (KAFL) treating the same as income from undisclosed sources after rejecting the assessee’s claim of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on sale of those shares. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld CITA was justified in upholding

MAHENDRA KUMAR BAID,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIRCLE 35, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1236/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Manish Kumar Baid -Vs- Acit, Cir-35, Kolkata [Pan: Ahmpb 3024 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1237/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mahendra Kumar Baid -Vs- Acit, Cir-35, Kolkata [Pan: Aejpb 7691 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 of the Act in respect of sale proceeds of shares of Kailash Auto Finance Limited (KAFL) treating the same as income from undisclosed sources after rejecting the assessee’s claim of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on sale of those shares. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld CITA was justified in upholding

SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm It(Ss)A No. 50/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year: 2020-21) Sanjay Kumar Gupta Jamuria Hat, Jamuria Thana Acit, Cc 2(1) More, Bypass Road, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Vs. Jamurai, Burdwan, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal West Bengal-713336 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aczpg4735H Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Sonam Bajoria, Ars Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

68, 69, 694. 698. 69C and 69D. provisions of section 115BBE were not attracted" vi. Accordingly, we direct the ld. AO to apply normal rate of tax as applicable to the business/ other source of income. Needless to state that the income assessed in A.Y. 2020-21 shall be excluded from ITA Nos. 50 &791/KOL/2025 Sanjay Kumar Gupta; A.Ys

SMS MACHINES PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 16/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sms Machines Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(4), 9, Ganesh Chandra Avenue Vs Kolkata Fiddley Chambers Suit No. 6 3Rd Floor Kolkata - 700013 [Pan : Aalcs8132R] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/10/2023 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 Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 1, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 27/08/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Passing Ex-Parte Order Without Providing Any Opportunity To The Appellant. As Such, The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A) Is Liable To Be Set Aside. 2. That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Assessing Officer Has Erred In Making Additions Of Rs. 1,86,58,000/- As Unexplained Cash Credit Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of A.O. & Passing Ex-Parte Order Without Allowing Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Appellant.

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the action of A.O. and passing ex-parte order without allowing proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 2 I.T.A. No. 16/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 SMS Machines Pvt. Ltd. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Assessing Officer

MSTC LTD,KOLKATA vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, CIR-1(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2021-22

234A, 234B and Section 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on disputed additions and levying interest of Rs. 1,90,68

HIMADRI VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, (OSD), WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

68 of the Act. 11. 14.06.2018 Copy of the appeal filed by the assessee was received in the office of the Id. Ld. Assessing Officer on 14.06.2018. 12. 29.01.2019 Notice under section 154 issued by the Ld. ACIT(OSD), Ward-(i), Kolkata for the mistake in not levying interest under section 234A

BIDYUT PRAKAS BHATTACHARYA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 52(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

234A amounting to Rs. 38,394 is liable to be summarily rejected. 3. Impugned levying interest under section 234B amounting to Rs. 1,72,773. The Learned Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru, has passed the order under section 154 in ignoring the foreign tax credit amounting to Rs 6,39,970 resulting into

HARI RAM AGARWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 22(4) , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby. T. Varkey & Shri M. Balaganeshi.T.A. No.2363/Kol/2018 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Hari Ram Agarwal Ito, Ward-22(4), Kolkata. -Vs- [Pan :Acdpa 1946 N]

68 of the Act in respect of sale proceeds of shares of Kailash Auto Finance Limited (KAFL) treating the same as income from undisclosed sources after rejecting the assessee’s claim of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) on sale of those shares. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld CITA was justified in upholding

M/S S.R.BATLIBOI & ASSOCIATES LLP,KOLKATA vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.237/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S S.R. Batliboi & Associates Llp………................……............…..….. Appellant 3Rd Floor, Bloc B, 22, Camac Street, Kolkata. [Pan: Achfs9118A] Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bangalore....................................................…..............……. Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. Ghosh, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 31, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 07, 2022 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.12.2021 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’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, S.R. Batliboi & Associates Llp ("The Appellant"), Respectfully Craves To Prefer An Appeal Against The Order Dated 21St Dec 2021 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - Nfac [“Cit(A)"], Delhi (Received By The Appellant On 21St Dec 2021) Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act'") On The Following Grounds Which Are Independent & Without Prejudice To Each Other: On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Cpc ("Ao") & Cit(A) Has: General 1. Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Ao In Computing Total Income Of The Appellant At Rs. 1,18,67,86,431 As Against Income Of Rs. 1,18,63,50, 198 Offered To Tax By The Appellant In Return Of Income For The Subject Assessment Year; Ex-Parte Order, Non-Grant Of Sufficient Opportunity Of Being Heard

234A of the Act of Rs. 10,53,320; Levy of interest under Section 234B of the Act 11. erred in levying interest under Section 234B of the Act of Rs. 2,68

M/S. ACONITE COMMOTRADE PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 9(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

234A & 234B of the income tax act, 1961. xi. For that the order of the ld. CIT(A) be modified and the assessee be given relief prayed for. xii. For that the assessee craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground before or at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee

MAHESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., CIRCLE - 36(1), KOLKATA

Bench: Him & Therefore, It Is Mentioned

68 of the Act chargeable to tax at special rate of the tax prescribed under section 115BBE of the said Act 7. That the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in charging interest of Rs.53,828 under section 234A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA, KOLKATA vs. ALOM EXTRUSIONS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.908/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dcit, C.C-4(2), Kolkata.................................................................……Appellant Vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd.........................…................…........……...…..…..Respondent 7B, Alom House, Pretoria Street, Kolkata-700071. [Pan: Aaaco3518N] Appearances By: Shri S. Dutta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca & Amit Agrawal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 14, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Department Against The Order Dated 14.06.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)- 27, 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 In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Made U/S 68 On Account Of Unsecured Loan Amounting To Rs.3,00,00,000/- As Unexplained Cash Credit Without Appreciating The Material Brought On Record & Facts Evaluated By The A.O In The Assessment Order.

section 133(6) to the lenders where duly acknowledged and all the lenders confirmed the loan transactions by filing the documents which were placed before the tribunal in the form of a paper book. These materials were available on the file of the Assessing Officer and there is no discussion on this aspect. Thus, the tribunal rightly dismissed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. PHPL PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

section 3.1 of CBDT circular no. 5/2024 dated 15/03/2024, falling under the category of cases involving organized tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries. 4. The department craves the right to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts

PROVASH SARDAR,C/O-S.K. KHETAN,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XIII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

234A, 234B and 234C and/or incorrectly calculating the same. The action of the AO was wholly unreasonable, uncalled for and bad in law. The Ld. CIT(A) was unjustified in confirming the action of the AO.” 5. The assessee is proprietor of M/s. Alankita Traders. Brief facts of the case are that pursuant to the search and seizure operation

PROVASH SARDAR,C/O-S.K. KHETAN,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XIII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

234A, 234B and 234C and/or incorrectly calculating the same. The action of the AO was wholly unreasonable, uncalled for and bad in law. The Ld. CIT(A) was unjustified in confirming the action of the AO.” 5. The assessee is proprietor of M/s. Alankita Traders. Brief facts of the case are that pursuant to the search and seizure operation

M/S PHILIPS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

234A of the Act. 10. Interest under section 234B 10.1 The Learned AO erred in levying interest of Rs. 39,96,22,576 under section 234B of the Act. 11. Interest under section 234D 11.1. The Learned AO erred in levying interest of Rs. 1,61,67,498 under section 234D of the Act. 12. Interest