IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM (Assessment Year:2017-18)

Jeenmata Real Estate Advisors DCIT, Central Circle-4(2), Private Limited Kolkata

21 and 22, 2nd Floor, Plot No.230, Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, 5th Floor, Vs. Sakhar Bhawan, Ramnath Goenka Room No.506, 110, Shantipally, Marg, Nariman Point, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal Mumbai-400021, Maharashtra (Appellant) (

Respondent)

PAN No. AACCJ0774D Assessee by : Shri Akkal Dudhewala, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT DR Date of hearing: 20.11.2024 Date of pronouncement : 17.01.2025

O R D E R

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 19.02.2024 for the AY 2017-18.

02. At the outset, we note that there is a delay of 12 days in filing the appeal. After hearing both the parties and after perusing the reasons as stated in the condonation petition duly supported with affidavit, the bench considered the delay to be attributable to the reasons which were cogent ,bonafide and genuine. Accordingly, the delay for 12 days is condoned and appeal is taken for adjudication.

03. The Revenue has challenged the order of ld. CIT (A) on the following grounds:-

“1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made u/s. 68 on account of sale consideration from sale of shares amounting to Rs. 7,85,95,921/- as unexplained cash credit without appreciating the material brought on record and facts evaluated by the A.O. in the assessment order.

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), Kolkata has erred in deleting the addition u/s. 69C r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act amounting to Rs. 39,29,796/-.

3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made u/s.68 & 69C of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating that the Assessing Officer had rightly made the additions in accordance with explanation 3 to section 147 which was inserted by the Finance Act, 2009 with effect from 01.04.1989.

4. The on the judgment of the case law as cited by the Ld. CIT(A) cannot be accepted as it does not squarely applicable to the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee.

5. That the Department craves leave to add, modify or alter any of the ground(s) of appeal and / or adduce additional evidence at any time during the appeal proceedings.”

04. The only issue raised at the time of hearing was whether the addition made by the ld. AO was valid which not subject matter of the reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act and since no addition has been made in respect of the item which was subject matter of reasons recorded, therefore, whether the ld. AO has jurisdiction to make any other addition which the ld. AO has noticed during the course of hearing.

05. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income on

26.10.2017, declaring total income of ₹10 and book profit u/s 115JB of the Act at ₹44,918/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and thereafter, the ld. AO received information from DCIT (Investigation), Wing-4(1), Kolkata, vide letter dated 12.09.2018, that the assessee company has received funds from Jamakharchi/ paper companies, operated by Praveen Agarwal, a Kolkata based entry operator. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 7.03.2019. The assessee complied with the said notice by filing return of income on 12.03.2019, declaring same income as was declared in the original return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. Thereafter, statutory notices were issued along with questionnaire, which were responded and complied by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ld. AO accepted the contention of the assessee with regard to the transaction with Kamaldhan Merchandise P