Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 2 ... vs Uday Overseas Private Limited
2026 Latest Caselaw 2021 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 2 ... vs Uday Overseas Private Limited on 18 March, 2026

Author: Rajarshi Bharadwaj

Bench: Rajarshi Bharadwaj

                                               1



OD - 21
                             IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                              Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax]

                                        ORIGINAL SIDE
                                         ITAT/245/2025
                                  IA NO: GA/1/2026, GA/2/2026
                       PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA
                                               VS
                                UDAY OVERSEAS PRIVATE LIMITED
BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ
                     And
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR
Date : 18th March, 2026
                                                                                 Appearance :
                                                                Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv.
                                                                        Mr. Raunak Seal, Adv.
                                                                              ...for appellant.

                                                                     Mr. Saurabh Bagaria, Adv.
                                                                          Mr. Rites Goel, Adv.
                                                                             ...for respondent.

The Court : There is a delay of 157 days in filing the appeal. We are satisfied

with the explanation offered for not preferring the appeal within time. Therefore, the

delay is condoned. The application is allowed.

IA No.GA/1/2026 is disposed of.

Heard learned counsels appearing for the parties.

The appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

"i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Learned ITAT erred in deleting the addition made u/s 68 of the I.T. Act 1961 to the tune of Rs.6,62,20, 000/- without going through the merits of the case that there is no explanation available in any way at the assessment stage, hence, deposit of the funds remained unexplained. The economic rationale behind such transaction is to provide accommodation entries for bringing back the unaccounted money/ fund of the clients to their regular books of accounts?

ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Hon'ble ITAT failed to appreciate the facts that the assessee was the ultimate beneficiary who has received Rs.6,62,20,000/- as accommodation entries for bringing back the unaccounted money/fund to its regular books of accounts in spite of the facts that the additions have already been made in the hands of share applicants' companies who are nothing but accommodation providers in the guise of share applicants to the assessee company?

iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Learned ITAT failed to appreciate the fact that the share applicants are in their initial years of operation, basically investment companies, their income tax returns show a nominal income/loss, no business activity, lack of financial worth for investing huge investment in shares?"

The appellant is directed to file requisite number of informal paper books

prepared out of court enclosing therein all relevant papers and documents used before

the learned trial court within 10 (ten) weeks from date by serving copies thereof to the

learned Advocate for the respondent.

Settlement of index and all other formalities are dispensed with.

Since the respondent is represented, service of notice of appeal stands dispensed

with.

Let this matter appear after twelve weeks.

GA/2/2026 stands disposed of.

(RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.)

(UDAY KUMAR, J.) sd/