COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION AND TRANSFER PRICING vs. SIGNIFY HOLDING B V

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date: 6Th May, 2025 Appearance: Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Sr. Adv. Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. Mr. Ankan Das, Adv. Mr. Anindya Kanan, Adv. Ms. Shradhya Ghosh, Adv. …For Appellant

condone the delay in filing the appeal. The application IA No: GA/1/2025 is allowed. The assessee preferred the appeal before the learned Tribunal against the directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) under Section 144C(5) of the Act dated December 22, 2022 for the assessment year 2020-21 passed against a draft assessment order under Section 144C

M/S SHEO SHAKTI COKE INDUSTRIES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 37, KOLKATA

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

condoned. The Review application being RVW 2 of 2022 be heard on merits. 10. The office is directed to register the review application. 11. CAN 1 of 2025 is accordingly disposed of. RVW 2 of 2022 1. The present review application arises out of the judgment dated 19.08.2019 passed in WP.CT 153 of 2019 The review has been assigned

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. PREMIER TIE UP PVT LTD

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

13. So far as the submission on behalf of the petitioners that the agreement was prior to the insertion of Sub-section (5) of Section 12 read with Seventh Schedule to the Act and therefore the disqualification under Sub-section (5) of Section 12 read with Seventh Schedule to the Act shall not be applicable and that once an arbitrator

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S ARMAN ADVISORY PVT LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : 10Th January, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Vipul Kundulia, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. ..For Appellant. Mr. Soumitra Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv. Mr. Samrat Das, Adv. …For Respondent. The Court: It Appears That There Is A Delay Of 342 Days In Filing The Appeal. We Have Heard Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Mr. Amit Sharma, Learned Counsel Appearing For The Appellant & Mr. Saumitra Chowdhury, Mr. Avra Mazumder, Learned Advocates Appearing For The Respondent. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Given In The Affidavit Filed With The Condone Delay Petition & The Delay Is Condoned. This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.03.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Ita No.

delay is condoned. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, (the Act) is directed against the order dated 11.03.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No. 2 315/Kol/2021 for the assessment year 2012-13. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1,KOLKATA vs. M/S PHALGUNI ENCLAVE PVT LTD

The appeal stands disposed of in

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Acting Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 8Th May, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. ...For Appellant Mr. S. Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. N. Mittal, Adv. …For Respondent The Court :- It Appears That There Is A Delay Of Twenty Days In Filing This Appeal. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Delay Condone Petition & We Find That Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. Hence, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. The Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Allowed. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.06.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench Kolkata (The Tribunal) In It(Ss) A No. 24/Kol/2021 & Co 05/Kol/2022 Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12.

condonation of delay is allowed. This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act (the Act) is directed against the order dated 16.06.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench Kolkata (the Tribunal) in IT(SS) A No. 24/Kol/2021 and CO 05/Kol/2022 relating to assessment year 2011-12. 2 The revenue

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. RASHMI METALIKS LTD.

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 7Th March, 2022 Appearance :- Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. Mr. Asok Bhowmick, Adv.

condonation of delay appears to be an elaborate affidavit, all that is manifest from such affidavit is absolute bureaucratic approach by the Income tax department leading to belatedly filing of the appeal. Though the affidavit seeks to give certain explanation, we find several loopholes in the affidavit and substantial number of days of delay remains unexplained, more particularly

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S GARDEN REACH SHIPBUILDERS AND ENGINEERS LTD

The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the Tribunal is set aside

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 07.09.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITAT No. 50/Kol/2020 for the assessment year 2012-13. The respondent has raised the following substantial question of law :- “Whether

KALI PADIP CHAUDHARI FOUNDATION vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), KOL-1

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

delay was condoned. Thereafter, the review applications were taken up for consideration and it was found that since a connected appeal arising out of the same order passed by the learned Tribunal was already admitted, the three other appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arises and this, in the opinion

KPC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), KOL-1

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

delay was condoned. Thereafter, the review applications were taken up for consideration and it was found that since a connected appeal arising out of the same order passed by the learned Tribunal was already admitted, the three other appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arises and this, in the opinion

KPC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), KOL-1

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

delay was condoned. Thereafter, the review applications were taken up for consideration and it was found that since a connected appeal arising out of the same order passed by the learned Tribunal was already admitted, the three other appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arises and this, in the opinion

KPC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) KOL-1

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

delay was condoned. Thereafter, the review applications were taken up for consideration and it was found that since a connected appeal arising out of the same order passed by the learned Tribunal was already admitted, the three other appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arises and this, in the opinion

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

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : 11Th March, 2024 Appearance : M S. Smita Das De, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Kartik Kurmy, Adv. (Vc) Mr. Indranil Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Subrata Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Debayan Dutta, Adv. …For Respondent. The Court : We Have Heard Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant Revenue & Mr. Kartik Kurmy, Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respondent Assessee. There Is A Delay Of 59 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Given By The Appellant Department For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. Hence, The Condone Delay Petition Is Allowed & Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned.

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 2 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 26th July, 2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `B’ Bench, Kolkata, in I.T.A No.255/Kol/2023 for the assessment year 2012-13. The revenue has raised the following substantial

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9,KOLKATA vs. MANJU OSATWAL

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

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

condonation of delay stands disposed of. ITAT No. 96 of 2021 4. 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 15th January, 2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA No. 707/Kol/2019 for the assessment year

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. RAVISH LAKHMANI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated : November 22, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Subhas Agarwal, Adv …For Respondent The Court :- We Have Heard Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respective Parties. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & Found Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Challenging The Orders Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal In Various Assessment Years. The Details Of The Appeal Numbers, Case Number Before The Learned Tribunal & The Assessment Year Under Consideration Are Set Out In A Tabulated Form Hereunder : Sl. No. Itat No. Date Of Order Assessment Year 1.

13, 14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/129/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022; GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus REETA LAKHMANI ITAT/127/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus RITIN LAKHMANI ITAT/128/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus JAIKISHAN LAKHMANI ITAT/130/2022

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. RITIN LAKHMANI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated : November 22, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Subhas Agarwal, Adv …For Respondent The Court :- We Have Heard Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respective Parties. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & Found Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Challenging The Orders Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal In Various Assessment Years. The Details Of The Appeal Numbers, Case Number Before The Learned Tribunal & The Assessment Year Under Consideration Are Set Out In A Tabulated Form Hereunder : Sl. No. Itat No. Date Of Order Assessment Year 1.

13, 14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/129/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022; GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus REETA LAKHMANI ITAT/127/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus RITIN LAKHMANI ITAT/128/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus JAIKISHAN LAKHMANI ITAT/130/2022

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. PRAVASH KUMAR LAKMANI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated : November 22, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Subhas Agarwal, Adv …For Respondent The Court :- We Have Heard Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respective Parties. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & Found Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Challenging The Orders Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal In Various Assessment Years. The Details Of The Appeal Numbers, Case Number Before The Learned Tribunal & The Assessment Year Under Consideration Are Set Out In A Tabulated Form Hereunder : Sl. No. Itat No. Date Of Order Assessment Year 1.

13, 14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/129/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022; GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus REETA LAKHMANI ITAT/127/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus RITIN LAKHMANI ITAT/128/2022 IA NO. GA/1/2022, GA/2/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA Versus JAIKISHAN LAKHMANI ITAT/130/2022

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. TANUJ PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED

The appeal stands disposed of with the above direction

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 14Th July, 2025.

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenging the order dated 19.2.2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA/1045/Kol/2023 for the assessment year 2012- 13. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : “1. Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CANTON VINIMAY PVT LTD

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

13, 2021. (Via Video Conference) Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. Mr. Manabendra Nath Bandyopadhyay, Adv. … for the appellant in ITAT 196 of 2019 & ITAT 125 of 2021 Mr. S. N. Dutta, Adv. … for the appellant in ITAT 196 of 2019 & ITAT 126 of 2021 3 Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, Adv. Mr. Asok Bhowmick, Adv. … for the appellant in ITAT