DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA V. UNITECH PAPER MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

MA 66/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata (Appellant) vs. Unitech Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd (Respondent), where the revenue filed miscellaneous applications seeking rectification of a consolidated order dated 22.10.2024. The original appeals were dismissed by the ITAT due to lack of tax effect and because the cases did not fall under any exceptions as per CBDT instruction no.5/2024. The revenue argued that the cases involved organized tax evasion including bogus capital gain, which should be considered under the exception clause. However, the Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had thoroughly examined the documents and facts presented by the assessee, which did not support the revenue's claims of organized tax evasion or bogus capital gains.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 784832 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2025
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect; Bogus Share capital; Bogus
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, 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 M.A. Nos.63 to 66/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2014-15 & 2012-13 DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata..………………. ……………..…...........Appellant vs. Unitech Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd……...……...............………........……...…..…..Respondent 53A, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, 3rd Floor, Kol – 700016. [PAN: AAACU3795M] Appearances by: Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Robin Maheshwari, ACA, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : October 10, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : November 10, 2025 ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The captioned miscellaneous applications have been filed by the revenue seeking for rectification of a consolidated order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Tribunal in IT(SS).A No.41/Kol/2024, IT(SS).A No.70/Kol/2024, IT(SS).A No.71/Kol/2024 & ITA No.1316/Kol/2024 respectively. Since, the issues involved in all the miscellaneous applications are common and relate to the same consolidated order of the Tribunal, therefore, these miscellaneous applications have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. The ld. DR by pressing the above miscellaneous applications has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee and deleted the addition of bogus share capital relying upon decision of Printed from counselvise.com M.A. Nos.63 to 66/Kol/2025 Unitech Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd 2 Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. in Civil Appeal No.6580 of 2021. He submits that the revenue preferred appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT and the ITAT has dismissed the appeal of the revenue vide his consolidated order dated 22/10/2024 in IT(SS).A No.41/Kol/2024, IT(SS).A No.70/Kol/2024, IT(SS).A No.71/Kol/2024 & ITA No.1316/Kol/2024, for want of tax effect as well as observing that cases does not fall in any of the exceptions laid down in CBDT instruction no.5/2024 dated 15/03/2024. The ld. DR further submits that though the ITAT has given the liberty to the department for filing of Miscellaneous Application for revival of these appeals on the ground that in case, re-verification of the facts come to the notice of the assessing officer as tax effect is more or in case, these cases fall in any of the exceptions provided in the said CBDT instruction. The ld. DR submits that the cases of the assessee fall under exception clause involving organised tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain as per para 3(h) of the CBDT instruction no.5/2024. 3. Contrary to that, the ld. AR vehemently opposed the submissions made by the ld. DR and submitted that the department did not bring any facts to establish that the case falls in any of the exception provided in CBDT instruction no.5/2024. The ld. AR submits that merely filing an application by submitting that the cases come in exception clauses cannot be a ground for restoration of the appeal. The ld. AR further submits that there is nothing in the order of the ld. CIT(A) which goes to say that the cases fall under the exception clause rather the ld. CIT(A) has discussed every fact and thereafter passed the order considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (supra) as there was no incriminating material unearthed during the course of search. He further submits that restoring of Printed from counselvise.com M.A. Nos.63 to 66/Kol/2025 Unitech Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd 3 appeals without any specific reason will nothing but misuse of law to harass the assessee. 4. Upon hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties and on perusal of the miscellaneous applications, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue of bogus share capital which was raised by the revenue for seeking restoration of the appeals through the miscellaneous applications. It is clearly evident from the order of the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee had duly submitted relevant documents to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions such as ITR acknowledgment of share applicants, audited accounts, bank statement reflecting the transaction, copy of ledger account of investment, ROC master data etc. and the net worth of the share subscribers were mentioned and transactions were made through banking channel by account payee cheque and the parties involved with the assessee in the transactions were regularly assessed under Income Tax and the Assessing Officer has not pointed out any defect in the documents submitted by the assessee and the share applicants. We further find from the order of the ld. CIT(A) that the year under consideration was an unabated/completed assessment year and time limit for issuing of notice u/s 143(2) was over on the date of search and no incriminating material was found during the search action. Under the circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) having considered the facts and relying on the various judicial precedents including PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held that the disallowance/additions made by the Assessing Officer vide order u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) in the particular assessment year are not sustainable, as these are not linked to any incriminating material found at the time of search. 5. Keeping in view the above facts, we do not find anything new issue or fact brought by the ld. DR through the instant miscellaneous Printed from counselvise.com M.A. Nos.63 to 66/Kol/2025 Unitech Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd 4 applications which requires for restoration of the appeals of the Tribunal. Therefore, we do not find the case of assessee falls under exception clause involving organised tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain vide para 3(h) of the CBDT instruction no.5/2024 dated 15/03/2024. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the instant miscellaneous applications filed by the revenue. 6. In the result, the captioned miscellaneous applications filed by the revenue are dismissed. Kolkata, the 10th November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Pradip Kumar Choubey] [Rajesh Kumar] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 10.11.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "