IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
I.T.A. No. 175 of 2003
S. K. Bothra & Sons, HUF
Vs
Income Tax Officer, Ward-46(3), Kolkata
Judgement on: August 2, 2011.
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.:
This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax (“Act”) is at the instance of an assessee and is directed against order dated 26th February, 2003 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 293/Kol/2002 for the Assessment Year 1997-1998 dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee.
Being dissatisfied, the assessee has come up with the present appeal.
The facts leading to filing of this appeal may be summed up thus:
a) The appellant is a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) and is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’). For the Assessment Year 1997- 98, after the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was initiated, the Assessing Officer issued summons under Section 131 of the Act to Sri K. K. Pant and Sri Asharam Mohata, the alleged creditors of the assessee. Sri Pant expired before issue of notice. Sri Mohata produced relevant documents along with a forwarding letter dated 15th January, 2000 confirming the genuineness of the loan.
b) On 30th March, 2000, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment, adding Rs. 15,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit and Rs. 2,84,602/- as interest payable to the loan creditors.
Paid content
Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.
ITAT Deletes ₹7.5 Cr Section 69C Addition on Recorded Consultancy Expenses
September 8, 2026
Section 68 Additions Cannot Rest Solely on Investigation Report: ITAT Mumbai
September 8, 2026
Third-Party Statement Alone Insufficient for ₹4 Cr Section 68 Addition: ITAT Mumbai
September 8, 2026CSR expenditure eligible for Section 80G deduction despite Section 37(1) disallowance: ITAT Mumbai
September 8, 2026
ITAT Pune Deletes Rs. 29.61 Crore Section 68 Addition on Partners’ Capital
September 8, 2026
