BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

62 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 14clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,701Delhi1,646Mumbai1,561Kolkata944Pune865Bangalore835Hyderabad602Jaipur510Ahmedabad494Nagpur317Raipur292Surat289Chandigarh268Karnataka232Visakhapatnam223Indore185Amritsar173Cochin145Cuttack132Lucknow118Rajkot116Panaji103Patna67Calcutta62SC50Jodhpur38Guwahati37Agra34Telangana30Dehradun30Allahabad29Varanasi19Jabalpur15Ranchi9Rajasthan7Orissa6Kerala5Himachal Pradesh4Andhra Pradesh4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1Punjab & Haryana1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 26325Section 260A21Section 143(3)12Addition to Income12Limitation/Time-bar12Section 6810Section 12A10Condonation of Delay10Section 10

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S Y R TRADERS PVT LTD

ITAT/198/2023HC Calcutta17 Nov 2023

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

Section 197Section 197(17)Section 264

condone the delay cannot be sustained and the same should be set aside. 11. In so far as the rejection order passed in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 is concerned, he would submit that since the respondent no.2 has proceeded to treat the refund of excess salary as a deduction from the salary on an erroneous premise

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDIAN ROADWAYS CORPORATION LTD.

ITAT/62/2020HC Calcutta08 Feb 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

Showing 1–20 of 62 · Page 1 of 4

9
Exemption7
Penny Stock6
Section 54B5
For Respondent: Mr. Atarup Banerjee
Section 5

condone the delay by enacting Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 in order to enable the Courts to do substantial justice to the parties by disposing of matters on merit. The expression sufficient cause used by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable the Courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which subserves the ends

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

ITAT/2/2022HC Calcutta08 Apr 2022

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

Section 5

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 ,CENTRAL -1 ,KOLKATA vs. RATAN KUMAR SOMANI

ITAT/171/2018HC Calcutta14 Feb 2022

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

Section 260A

14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/171/2018 IA NO:GA/1/2018 [OLD NO:GA/1217/2018] PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA VS. RATAN KUMAR SOMANI ……… ITAT/171/2018 IA NO:GA/2/2018 [OLD NO:GA/1224/2018] PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA VS. RATAN KUMAR SOMANI ……… PRESENT: THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM

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

ITAT/81/2022HC Calcutta26 Sept 2022

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

For Respondent: Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Adv
Section 34Section 36(1)Section 36(2)

delaying a decision on such application cannot midway turn around and decide not to pursue the challenge application, and then prefer an independent application under Section 14 of the Act before the Court, basically on the same ground raised in the former, urging that de jure inability of the arbitrator disqualifies him to continue proceedings. The learned Judge was right

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

The appeal stands disposed of in

ITAT/281/2022HC Calcutta08 May 2023

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.

Section 132Section 132ASection 153Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 260A

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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA I, KOLKATA vs. CHLORIDE INTERNATIONAL LTD

The appeal stands dismissed on the ground of low tax effect

ITAT/154/2011HC Calcutta11 May 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 11Th May, 2022. Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. ….For Appellant Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Ms. Smita Das Dey, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant/Revenue & Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Learned Advocate Appearing For The Respondent/Assessee. There Is A Delay In Filing The Appeal & This Application Being Ga/1/2011 (Old No. Ga/1658/2011) Has Been Filed For Condonation Of Delay. There Was A Condition Imposed By The Division Bench Of This Court On 17Th August, 2011 That The Appellant Shall Pay A Cost Of Rs.10,000/- To The Counsel For The Respondent. This Condition Has Not Been Complied With.

Section 260A

condonation of delay stands allowed. ITAT/154/2011 This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 31st October 2005 in ITA Nos. 436 & 474/Kol/2002 for the assessment year 1998-99. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration :- i) Whether, on the facts

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 KOLKATA vs. M/S EXIDE INDUSTRIES LTD

ITAT/45/2021HC Calcutta14 Feb 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : February 14, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Mr. S.N. Dutta, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant/Revenue & Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Learned Senior Counsel, Duly Assisted By Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Learned Counsel For The Respondent/Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 254

14, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … for the appellant Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Adv. … for the respondent The Court : We have heard Mr. S.N. Dutta, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, learned senior counsel, duly assisted by Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee

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

ITAT/80/2024HC Calcutta11 Mar 2024

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.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260ASection 68

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

ITAT/96/2021HC Calcutta11 Feb 2022

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

For Appellant: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Swapna Das, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 180Section 182Section 260ASection 263

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

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

ITAT/188/2018HC Calcutta06 Apr 2022

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 263ASection 4Section 44ASection 80Section 80I

14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/188/2018 IA NO: GA/1/2018 (Old No:GA/1412/2018) PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. BENGAL UNITED CREDIT BELANI HOUSING LTD. ITAT/188/2018 IA NO: GA/1/2018 (Old No:GA/1414/2018) PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. BENGAL UNITED CREDIT BELANI HOUSING LTD. BEFORE

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. RAVISH LAKHMANI

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

ITAT/133/2022HC Calcutta22 Nov 2022

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.

Section 10Section 260ASection 263Section 68

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

ITAT/127/2022HC Calcutta22 Nov 2022

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.

Section 10Section 260ASection 263Section 68

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

ITAT/130/2022HC Calcutta22 Nov 2022

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.

Section 10Section 260ASection 263Section 68

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. SMT RACHANA TODI

Accordingly, the appeal fails and dismissed

ITAT/272/2022HC Calcutta31 Jan 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 31St January, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. …For Appellant. Mr. Dibanath Dey, Adv. Ms. Pallavi Pain, Adv. …For Respondent

Section 2(14)(iii)Section 260ASection 263Section 54B

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 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 31.3.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench Kolkata in ITA No. 137/Kol/2021 for the assessment year 2016-17. The Revenue has raised the following substantial

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S SETHIA OIL INDUSTRIES LTD

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

ITAT/16/2021HC Calcutta16 Jun 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 12Th May, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Abhradip Maity, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Rahul Dhanuka, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : - Heard Learned Counsel On Either Side. There Is A Delay Of 384 Days In Filing This Appeal. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Condone Delay Petition & Find Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. The Revenue Has Filed This Appeal Under Section 35G Of The Central Excise Act, Challenging The Order Passed By The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal, East Zonal Bench, Kolkata Dated 17.12.2019. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :- (I) Whether The Learned Tribunal Erred In Not Holding That Availing Credit By The Respondent Cannot Be Substantive Right Since The

Section 2Section 35G

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The revenue has filed this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, challenging the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Tribunal, East Zonal Bench, Kolkata dated 17.12.2019. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration :- (i) Whether the Learned Tribunal erred in not holding

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

ITAT/169/2025HC Calcutta10 Sept 2025

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.

Section 260ASection 35A

14,356/- ? b. Whether the learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law allowing 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

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S BOULEVARD SERVICE PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue fails on the ground

ITAT/70/2021HC Calcutta14 Feb 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : February 14, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Mr. S.N. Dutta, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant/Revenue & Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Duly Assisted By Ms. Swapna Das, Learned Counsel For The Respondent/Assessee. There Is A Delay Of 816 Days In Filing The Appeal. The Respondent Has Filed Affidavit-In-Opposition Vehemently Opposing The Delay. On

Section 260A

14, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … for the appellant Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. … for the respondent The Court : We have heard Mr. S.N. Dutta, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, duly assisted by Ms. Swapna Das, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. There is a delay

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

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

ITAT/46/2020HC Calcutta23 Nov 2022

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

Section 148Section 260ASection 41Section 41(1)

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 SOVA ISPAT LIMITED

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

ITAT/235/2024HC Calcutta25 Sept 2024

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : September 25, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Vipul Kundulia, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. …For Appellant.

Section 260A

14 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (IINCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/235/2024 IA NO: GA/1/2024, GA/2/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA VS M/S SOVA ISPAT LIMITED BEFORE : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM -A N D- HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK DATE : September 25, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Vipul Kundulia, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma