DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. STARMILK PRODUCTS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1107/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the revenue failed to provide plausible reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, the condonation petition was rejected, and the appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed on account of the delay.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against an order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2018-2019. The appeal was filed with a delay of 57 days, for which the revenue submitted a condonation petition.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal by the revenue should be condoned given the reasons provided in their condonation petition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Hearing: 08/09/2025Pronounced: 08/09/2025

(निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year :2018-2019) DCIT, Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata Vs Starmilk Products Private Ltd 8, Saha Court, 1st Floor, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkata-700013 PAN No. :AAVCS 8888 C (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Raja Sengputa, CIT-DR निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 08/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 08/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Per George Mathan, JM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 18.01.2024 for the assessment year 2018-2019.

2.

Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT-DR appeared on behalf of the revenue and Shri Amit Agarwal, ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee.

3.

An adjournment application has been filed by Shri Amit Agarwal, ld. AR on behalf of the assessee stating therein the reasons which are not plausible and, therefore, we reject the adjournment application of the ld. AR and proceed to dispose off the appeal of the revenue. 4. The revenue has filed this appeal on 17.05.2024 with a delay of 57 days. The appeal has been posted on multiple occasions. Notices have been issued through RPAD and through email also. Ld. AR has also represented on behalf of the assessee on 13.05.2025 and on today i.e. on 2 ITANo.1107/Kol/2024 08.09.2025. The revenue has filed condonation petition stating therein as under :-

5.

A perusal of the above petition of the revenue filed for condonation of delay, shows that the revenue has not stated any reasons for 3 ITANo.1107/Kol/2024 condonation of delay. Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed on account of delay.

6.

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 08/09/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →