TRADELINK CARRYING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(1), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkery, Am ]

68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( in short, the ‘Act’ hereinafter). 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its e- return for the assessment year 2013-14 on 16-09-2013 declaring total income of Rs. 1,17,810/-. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny through CASS. The AO notes

FIZAAN COMMOTRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-15(1), KOLKATA

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

92 of the paper book and the source of investment of Rs. 80 lacs is found at page 93 of the paper book. Thus, according to the Ld. AR, the assessee had discharged the burden on it to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction. So, merely because the directors did not appear before the AO, the share

ITO, WARD-10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TOPAZ ENCLAVE PVT.LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravii.T.A. No. 2271/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata.................................………....………………...…………………….….Appellant

92,100/- from the very same shareholders towards share premium. The share capital received by the assessee has been duly accepted by the ld. AO within the ken of section 68

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. LAL BABA SEAMLESS TUBES PVT. LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

92,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 read with section 158BBE on account of alleged

LAL BABA SEAMLESS TUBES (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

92,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 read with section 158BBE on account of alleged

M/S WISLEY REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-11(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 55/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Wisley Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.,…..........Appellant 86C, Viswakarma, 1St Floor, Topsia Road, Tiljala, Kolkata-700046 [Pan:Aakcs8704L] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……..........................Respondent Ward-11(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 18Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 6Th , 2024 O R D E R

section 68 of the Act for the alleged sum and assessed the income at Rs.1,76,57,500/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). It was submitted by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) that the main object of the assessee-company is Real estate developments in various fields. The promoters

ITO, WARD-10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TREND INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2270/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Trend Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aadct 6373 M ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2273/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Happy Bagans Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacch 3712 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

92,100/- from the very same shareholders towards share premium. The share capital received by the assessee has been duly accepted by the ld. AO within the ken of section 68

ITO, WARD-10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HAPPY BAGANS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2270/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Trend Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aadct 6373 M ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2273/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Happy Bagans Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacch 3712 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

92,100/- from the very same shareholders towards share premium. The share capital received by the assessee has been duly accepted by the ld. AO within the ken of section 68

ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S VISHNU DISTRIBUTORS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of any merit, hence dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 50/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-2013

section 68 in the context of the facts of the case. The assessing officer issued notices u/s 133(6) 14 share subscribers, calling for certain evidences, among which were: (i)copy of share application Form and also copy of share allotment letter. (ii)details of shares that have been allotted with distinctive nos. of shares. (iii)name address

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SDR MEGHNATH INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

section 68 was introduced from 1.4.2013, it was not applicable for the period relevant for the instant appeal. These were also produced before the AO as stated in the statement recorded u/s 131 on 13.03.2015 before the AO in response to Question No. 13” 3.5. We further find that ld. CIT(A) has also gone through the net worth

ITO, WARD-10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S POSITIVE PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

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

92,100/- from the very same shareholders towards share premium. The share capital received by the assessee has been duly accepted by the ld. AO within the ken of section 68

ITO, WARD-10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GATEWAY ENCLAVE PVT.LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

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

92,100/- from the very same shareholders towards share premium. The share capital received by the assessee has been duly accepted by the ld. AO within the ken of section 68

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA vs. EDMOND FINVEST PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

68 along with disallowance of interest expenses thereon of Rs.1,94,958/-, by merely relying on the form rather than the substance of impugned unsecured loan transactions? 3) Whether on facts of the case and in law, CIT(A) has erred in allowing assessee’s appeal on addition made in respect of unsecured loans from three parties along with disallowance

MOONLINK MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

68 of the Act on account of share capital/premium claimed by the Moonlink Marketing Private Limited assessee. The Ld. AO passed this order after there was no response from the Directors of the assessee company in response to summons issued by the Ld. AO under Section 131 of the Act. Also, notices u/s 133(6) of the Act issued

KAJAL KUMAR ROY,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M. Jagtap] I.T.A. No. 1568/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Kajal Kumar Roy.............................…………………………………………Appellant C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, “Seven Brothers”, Lodge, Buroshibtala, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 105 [Pan : Adgprs 8137 G] Income Tax Officer...................……………………………………………….......Respondent Ward 1(4), Hooghly Aayakar Bhawan, G.T. Road Khadina More, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 101 Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Satyajit Mondal, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 31, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 22, 2017 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 6, Kolkata Dated 20.04.2017 & The Solitary Issue Involved Therein Relates To The Addition Of Rs. 13,03,000/- Made By The A.O. & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit (A) On Account Of Loans Taken By The Assessee From Four Parties By Treating The Same As Unexplained Cash Credits Under Section 68. 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is An Individual Who Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Potatos. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Filed By Him On 25.09.2011 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 10,92,457/- Including Agricultural Income Of Rs.

section 68. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who is engaged in the business of trading of potatos. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by him on 25.09.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 10,92

ITO, WARD- 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DSR IMPEX PVT. LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2087/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

92,00,000 Ltd 2000 fully paid Rs up shares of 2,00,000 Circle Infra Pvt Projects The assessee had duly The assessee had duly recorded purchases of such investment and were recorded purchases of such investment and were reflected under schedule 2.5 of the annual accounts of the assesses. reflected under schedule 2.5 of the annual accounts

DCIT, CENTRAL -4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJESH AUTO MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 by proving the identity of the creditors by giving their complete addresses, GIR Nos./PAN\nas well as confirmations along with the copies of assessment orders of individual creditors wherever readily\navailable, cash credits could not be treated as non-genuine on the ground that summons issued to some of the\ncreditors could not be served

M/S. VASUPUJYA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 1(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 68. 3. The addition of Rs.15,67,92,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 68