Case LawHigh Court › This Appeal Filed By The Income Tax Depa...

This Appeal Filed By The Income Tax Department Is Directed Against Theorder Dated 18.3.2020 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench v. M/S Abhijeetenterprise Ltd

High Court 19 Feb 2024 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
This Appeal Filed By The Income Tax Department Is Directed Against Theorder Dated 18.3.2020 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench v. M/S Abhijeetenterprise Ltd
Date of order
19 Feb 2024
Assessment year(s)
2012-13
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In This Appeal Filed By The Income Tax Department Is Directed Against Theorder Dated 18.3.2020 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench v. M/S Abhijeetenterprise Ltd, the High Court (2024) allowed the appeal under Section 68, Section 260A of the Income-tax Act. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Issue: Therevenue has raised the following substantial question of law for consideration :-“i) Whether the Hon’ble Tribunal has substantially erred in law inupholding the decision of the Learned CIT (Appeals)-9, Kolkata therebydeleting the addition of Rs.6,00,00,000/- under Section 68 of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 as unexplained...

Decision: Thus, following the decision the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

OD–10 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/50/2024IA NO: GA/1/2024, GA/2/2024PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX 1 KOLKATAVSALISHAN STEELS PVT LTD BEFORE :THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : 19[th] February, 2024. Appearance :Mr. Om Narayan Rai, Adv.Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.…for appellantMr. Ramesh Kr. Patodia, Adv.Ms. Megha Agarwal, Adv.…for respondent The Court :- We have heard learned Counsel on either side. It appears that there is a delay of 1132 days in filing the appeal, thoughthe explanation offered is not fully satisfactory, since this appeal has been filedunder Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, we are required to examine as towhether any substantial questions of law arise for consideration. Therefore, weexercise discretion and condone the delay in filing the appeal. The application isallowed. This appeal filed by the Income Tax Department is directed against theorder dated 18.3.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 2244/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. Therevenue has raised the following substantial question of law for consideration :-“i) Whether the Hon’ble Tribunal has substantially erred in law inupholding the decision of the Learned CIT (Appeals)-9, Kolkata therebydeleting the addition of Rs.6,00,00,000/- under Section 68 of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 as unexplained cash credit in the form of share capital andshare premium only on the ground that no cash or cheque was actuallyreceived by the respondent assessee and the purchase of share assets andallotment of share by the assessee was under barter system ? After we have elaborately heard the learned Advocates for the parties wehave no hesitation to hold that substantial question of law raised in this appealhas to be answered against the appellant/revenuer in the light of the decision ofthis Court in ITAT/187/2023 dated 17.11.2023 in the case of ITAT/187/2023PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1,KOLKATA VS. M/S ABHIJEETENTERPRISE LTD. Thus, following the decision the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM)CHIEF JUSTICE (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan