PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -2, KOLKATA vs. CEMENT INTERNATIONAL LTD.

The appeal is dismissed on the ground of low

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 10Th May, 2022. Appearance:- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv.

condonation of delay being GA/1/2018 (Old No:GA/1094/2018) is allowed. ITAT/147/2018 This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act for brevity) is directed against the order dated 2nd 2 August, 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata in I.T.A.(SS) A. Nos. 142 to 147/KOL/2016

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-III vs. M/S. VIVADA INLAND WATERWAYS LTD.

Accordingly, the appeal (ITAT/11/2011) stands dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3 We have perused the order passed by the tribunal which is impugned before us and we find that the tribunal has approved the factual finding recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The matter pertains to the applicability of the provisions of Section 41(1) of the Act. The tribunal after

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

delay in filing this appeal is condoned. The application, IA NO.GA/1/2021 stands disposed of accordingly. RE: ITAT/170/2021 This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (the Act, in brevity) is directed against the order dated 31.7.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA Nos.621

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S DIC INDIA LIMITED

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

condonation of delay. The impugned order was passed by the learned Tribunal on 4.1.2023, copy of which was received by the appellant/revenue on 1.2.2023. The appeal ought to have been filed on or before 31.5.2023 but has been filed on 4.7.2025 and in this process there is a delay of 884 days after deducting

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S SHIVAM DHATU UDYOG LTD

Accordingly, the application being IA No: GA/1/2023, is dismissed and

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 5Th August, 2025

deducting 120 days, the time provided under the Act, a delay has been computed 657 days. We have gone through the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

condonation of delay being IA No.GA/1/2022 is allowed. This appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is against the order dated 21st October, 2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘Virtual Court-A’ Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA Nos.1195 & 1776/Kol/2019 for the assessment year 2011-12. The revenue has raised

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA II, KOLKATA vs. NAGREEKA EXPORTS

The appeal stands dismissed on the ground of low tax

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 3Rd February, 2022 Appearance :- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv.

condonation of delay is allowed. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 29th March, 2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `D’ Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos.604 and 605/Kol/2003 and C.O. Nos.55 and 56/Kol/2003 for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97. Revenue

MA/S SKYSCRAPER PROJECTS PVT LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(2), KOLKATA

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

condone delay application, GA 1 of 2025, is allowed. The issue involved in the instant case is whether the learned Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order passed by the Appellate authority namely, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal - 4), Kolkata [CIT(A)] and remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer to consider whether addition is required to be made

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX 4, KOLKATA vs. M/S BENGAL UNITED CREDIT BELANI HOUSING LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

delay has already been condoned, the application being IA NO: GA/1/2018 (Old No:GA/1412/2018) is allowed. ITAT/188/2018 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 31st July, 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Kolkata in ITA 155/Kol./2017

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S SOVA ISPAT LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

condonation of delay is allowed. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 19.08.2020 2 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata in I.T.A. No.2067/Kol/2019 for the assessment year 2012-13. The respondent has raised the following substantial questions of law :- i) Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT CO. LTD

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

condonation of delay being IA No.GA/1/2021 is allowed. Re: ITAT/164/2021 This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 5th December, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.1470/Kol/2019 for the assessment year 2015-16. The revenue has raised the following

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA vs. SRI RAHUL SARAF

The appeal stands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : September 20, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. Ms. Doyel Dey, Adv. …For Appellant. Mr. Soumitra Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv. Mr. Pranabesh Sarkar, Adv. Mr. Suman Bhowmik, Adv. Mr. Samrat Das, Adv. Ms. Elina Dey, Adv. Mr. Sourendra Nath Banerjee, Adv. …For Respondent

condonation of delay is allowed. This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenging the order dated 9th August, 2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench Kolkata in ITA (S.S.) A. No.:117/Kol/2022 for the assessment year 2009-10. 2 The revenue has raised the following

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -2, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HIMADRI SPECIALITY CHEMICALS LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

condonation of delay (IA No.GA/1/2022) is allowed. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ for brevity) is directed against the order dated 3rd January, 2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No.1351/Kol/2019 for the assessment year 2012-13. The revenue

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. AMBUJA NEOTIA HEALTHCARE VENTURE LIMITED

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 10Th September, 2025. Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv., …For Appellant.

deduction under section 35AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?” We have heard Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, learned standing counsel for the appellant/department and Mr. Soumya Kejriwal, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 2 The impugned order was passed on 5.7.2023 and the certified copy of the order was received by the department on 5.9.2023. The appeal ought to have been filed

ANIRUDH BHUWALKA vs. DY. COMMISSSONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(I) KOL AND ANR

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, is directed against the order dated 31st January, 2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata ‘SMC’ Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No.513/Kol/2021 and ITA No.514/Kol/2021 for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20. We have

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12,KOLKATA vs. M/S.SOORAJMULL NAGARMULL

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

condoned the delay in filing the appeal. GA No. 01 of 2020 is allowed. 3. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Act is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench Kolkata (Tribunal), dated 20.07.2018 in ITA No. 1907/Kol/2016 for the assessment year 2001-2002. ITAT

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT CO. LTD.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of law

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : 12Th September, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. Abhijit Chatterjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gopal Ram Sharma, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd July, 2020, Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, `D Virtual Court’, Kolkata (Tribunal) In Ita No. 1486/Kol/2019, For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :- A. Whether The Learned Tribunal Has Committed Substantial Error In Law In Confirming The Decision Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) In Allowing Long Term Capital Loss Of Rs. 1,09,80,30,873/- On Transfer Of Government Securities After Applying Cost Inflation Index On Sale Of Government Securities & Holding He Government Securities Are Not Bond & Debentures For The Purpose Of 3Rd Proviso To Section 48 Of The Act (4Th Proviso After Amendment) Which Is Petently Wrong & Latently Irregular ?

condonation of the delay, the appeal stood rejected. Therefore, the order passed in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2010-11 stands affirmed. Accordingly, the substantial question of law no.(A) is answered against the revenue. The question of law nos.(C) to (F) were raised by the revenue before this Court in the assessee

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOL-IV , KOLKATA vs. M/S PHILIPS INDIA LTD .

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 11Th May, 2022. Appearance : Mr. Prithu Dudheria, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. A.K. De, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27Th January, 2006 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata In Ita No.1746(Cal) Of 1998 For The Assessment Year 1995- 96. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration : A) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Tribunal Was Justified In Law In Directing The Assessing

deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act by observing that since Rs.5,17,57,625/- is treated as business income and not as income from other sources and explanation (baa) below sub-section 4B of Section 80HHC is not attracted. b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Tribunal was justified