आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata..……………………….……….……….……Appellant vs.

M/s Dhunseri Ventures Ltd…………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent

4A, Dhunseri House, Woodburn Park, Kol - 700020..

[PAN: AABCK1597K]

Appearances by:

Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent.

Date of concluding the hearing : October 08, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : October 16, 2025 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:

This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order dated

24.12.2024 of the Commissioner of Income Tax-22, Kolkata [‘CIT(A)’] passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2017–18.

2. The appeal has been filed by the revenue with a delay of 37 days. The revenue has filed an affidavit for condonation of the delay. After considering the reasons cited in the affidavit for condonation of delay, we find that the reasons are valid and consequently, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits.

3. Brief facts of the case are that for the relevant to the assessment year, the assessee filed its return of income under normal provisions of Rs.16,99,91,480/- and income u/s 115JB of Rs.64,10,09,300/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued. Going over the balance sheet of the assessee, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company for the year ended 31.03.2014 had invested in shares during the financial year which has potential of earning exempt income. It has been further observed that during the financial year 2013-14, the assessee company has received dividend of Rs.2,20,000/- and Rs.3,24,00,000/- on profit on sale of current investment as reflected in audited account. The assessee has been asked to furnish explanation and the assessee furnished explanation. The Assessing Officer after considering the submission made by the assessee, the disallowance u/s 14A has been computed at Rs.3,04,053/-. The Assessing Officer has further held that on verification of 26AS statement, it is seen that the assessee has not accounted the incomes earned from Allahabad Bank, receipt from M/s Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., interest from PNB & SBI, receipt from M/s Innovative Tech Pack Ltd. and calculated the total at Rs.5,45,696/- and added the amount in the total income of the assessee. The Assessing Officer has assessed the total income at Rs.46,62,79,390/-.

4. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been partly allowed. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs.29,54,38,158/- on account of sales tax remission.

5. Being aggrieved by the said order, the revenue preferred appeal before us by taking the following grounds of appeal:

6. The ld. AR supports the impugned order thereby submitting that there is nothing in the impugned order to interfere as in the course of assessment, the assessee furnished submission along with the statement by giving details of subsidy received from the Govt. of W.B and submitted the relevant supporting documents. The ld. AR further submits along with such details assessee also furnished submission explaining the purpose of subsidy granted by the State Govt. and as to why it was treated to be in the nature of capital receipt. The ld. AR further submits that subsidy was granted for setting up new industrial unit but the mode of paying the subsidy was by way of remission of sales tax collection. The ld. AR further submit that in the present case, the object of the subsidy was to promote and encourage of setting up new industrial project in the State and t