TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 452
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... November 10, 2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal "B" Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA/375/Kol/2023 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : "a. WHETHER on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in law as well as in facts by rejecting the appeal of the revenue without adjudicating the merits of the appeal? b. WHETHER on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse as it has failed to adjudicate on the facts that the issue covered in order u/s. 263 was different from the issues on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act. A small prelude is required before we embark upon to exercise and examine the correctness of the decision of the learned Tribunal, impugned in this appeal. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year under consideration (AY 2012-13) on 6.2.2012 declaring a loss of Rs. 74,252/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and an assessment order was passed under section 143(3) of the Act on 20.3.2015 wherein the entire share capital raised by the assessee was added and the total income was assessed at Rs. 79,14,03,750/-. To be noted that the assessing officer does not dispute the fact that the assessee provided the relevant document and explained the transaction apart fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alleged to have been received from DDIT (Investigation), Unit-4(2), Kolkata through their letter dated 27.2.2019 that the assessee had taken accommodation entry of Rs. 2,48,50,000/- from Sandeep Roy, proprietor of M/s. Sarika Trading Company. Notices were issued under section 142(1) of the Act and on 15.11.2019 show cause notices were issued by the assessing officer in course of reassessment proceedings. The assessee filed its return on 1.12.2019 and also filed the copies of the audited financials and the bank statement during the course of reassessment proceedings and also requested for the reasons for reopening and specifically denied that they have not entered into any transaction with Sandeep Roy or his firm. This could be seen from the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../375/Kol/2023 which was allowed by the learned Tribunal by an order dated 10.11.2023, which is impugned in this appeal. As against the order passed by the learned Tribunal in ITA/495/Kol/2022 dated 6.3.2023, the revenue preferred appeal before this Court in ITAT/267/2023 which was dismissed by judgment dated 8.1.2024. The relevant part of the judgment is quoted hereinbelow : "The short question which falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax was justified in invoking his jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act for the second time from the same issue. The learned Tribunal after carefully going through the facts of the case found that in the second round of assessment proceeding the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se on hand. Thus on reappreciation of the factual position the Tribunal has found that it is not the case of non application of mind by assessing officer nor the case of failure of reappreciation of facts. Thus the Tribunal on facts rightly granted relief to the assessee. Thus We find no questions of law much less substantial questions of law arising for consideration in this appeal." 6. The above dates and events will clearly show that the assessee has been exposed to multiple proceedings for the very same assessment. Be that as it may, when we carefully go through the materials placed on record as well as the reasoning given by the learned Tribunal we find that the decision taken by the learned Tribunal was fully justified in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....allowance or share capital or loan, etc. It is not in dispute that the assessee has produced the books of accounts and the bank statement to demonstrate that there was no transaction with the alleged accommodation entry provider, Mr. Sandeep Roy, proprietor of M/s. Sarika Trading Co. The factual aspect of the matter as regards the share capital and the share premium was examined by the assessing officer in detail and the documents and details furnished by the assessee were accepted while passing the assessment order dated 30.12.2016. The attempt to revise the said order by way of a second revisional order under section 263 proved futile as the assessee was successful before the Tribunal as well as before this Court. Thus, the learned Tribun....