PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHELTER PROJECT LTD

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

condonation of delay stands allowed. Re: ITAT/60/2020 We have perused this appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(the Act) as directed against the order dated 17th October, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.737/Kol/2014 for the assessment year 2009-10. The revenue has raised the following substantial question

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL - 1 KOLKATA vs. SHRI SANJAY DHINGRA

In the result, the appeals are allowed and the order passed by the learned

Bench: :

21 of 2021. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …for the appellant in ITAT 20 of 2021. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv. Mr. Binayak Gupta, Adv. …for the respondents. The Court : There is a delay of 502 days in filing the appeal being ITAT/21/2021. We are satisfied with the reasons given in the affidavit filed in 2 support of the condone delay petition

PR. CIT CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. SIDHANT GUPTA

In the result, the appeals are allowed and the order passed by the learned

Bench: :

21 of 2021. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …for the appellant in ITAT 20 of 2021. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv. Mr. Binayak Gupta, Adv. …for the respondents. The Court : There is a delay of 502 days in filing the appeal being ITAT/21/2021. We are satisfied with the reasons given in the affidavit filed in 2 support of the condone delay petition

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4,KOLKATA vs. M/S. TANTIA CONSTRUCTION LTD

In the result, the appeals are allowed and the order passed by the learned

Bench: :

21 of 2021. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …for the appellant in ITAT 20 of 2021. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv. Mr. Binayak Gupta, Adv. …for the respondents. The Court : There is a delay of 502 days in filing the appeal being ITAT/21/2021. We are satisfied with the reasons given in the affidavit filed in 2 support of the condone delay petition

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 5 KOLKATA vs. SHYAM KUMAR AND SONS HUF

Bench: :

condonation of delay is allowed. ITAT/162/2022 This appeal by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 26th June, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “SMC” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA No. 1052 (Kol)/2019 for the assessment year 2015-2016. The revenue has raised

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX 4, KOLKATA vs. SRI SANDIP GOSWAMI

The appeal stands disposed of on the ground

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date: November 23, 2021. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. Radha Mohan Roy, Adv. … For The Appellant Re: Ia No:Ga/1/2017 (Old No. Ga/1842/2017) In Itat/215/2017 The Court : This Application Has Been Filed To Condone The Delay In Preferring The Appeal. We Have Heard Mr. Radha Mohan Roy, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant/Revenue. There Is A Delay Of 21

21 2 days in filing the appeal. Learned standing counsel for the appellant submitted on instruction from the Ministry of Law that the appeal is hit by the Circular issued by the CBDT and cannot be pursued by the Revenue on account of low tax effect. Therefore, we dispense with the issuance of the notice to the respondent and condone

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

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

21 of 2015. This appears to have not been brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Division Bench. The assesssee carried the matter in appeal to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 3229 and No.3221 of 2016 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court by order dated 14th March, 2016 took note of the submissions made

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

21 of 2015. This appears to have not been brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Division Bench. The assesssee carried the matter in appeal to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 3229 and No.3221 of 2016 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court by order dated 14th March, 2016 took note of the submissions made

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

21 of 2015. This appears to have not been brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Division Bench. The assesssee carried the matter in appeal to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 3229 and No.3221 of 2016 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court by order dated 14th March, 2016 took note of the submissions made

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

21 of 2015. This appears to have not been brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Division Bench. The assesssee carried the matter in appeal to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 3229 and No.3221 of 2016 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court by order dated 14th March, 2016 took note of the submissions made

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

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

21 & 22 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE IA NO.GA/1/2021 In ITAT/70/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, KOLKATA VS. M/S. BOULEVARD SERVICES PVT. LTD. IA NO.GA/2/2021 In ITAT/70/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, KOLKATA VS. M/S. BOULEVARD SERVICES PVT. LTD. BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM

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 ?

21 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/174/2021 IA No.GA/2/2021 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA VS. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD. BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA Date : 12th September, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….for appellant Mr. Abhijit

PRINCIPAL CIT , CENTRAL -2, KOLKATA vs. BRIJENDRA KUMAR PODDAR

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S.Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated : November 23, 2021. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Advocate …For Appellant Mr. R K Murarka, Advocae Mr. S. Roychowdhury, Advocate …For Respondent The Court :- We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Assigned In The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Application Regarding The Delay In Filing The Appeal. The Delay Is Condoned. The Application Stands Allowed.

delay is condoned. The application stands allowed. 2 This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act in brevity) is directed against the order dated 22.09.2017, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos. 93 and 94/Kol/2017 relating to Assessment Years 2006-07 & 2007-08. The revenue

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

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 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S ANJANIPUTRA NIRMAN PVT LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 2Nd September, 2025

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application, IA NO: GA/1/2024, is allowed. The revenue is aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Tribunal dated 8th December, 2023 by which the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-4 (PCIT) under section

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. M/S BALAJI DEVELOPERS

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 9Th January, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. Avra Majumder, Adv. Mr. Binayak Gupta, Adv. Mr. Suman Bhowmick, Adv. …For The Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant & Mr. Avra Majumder, Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respondent/Assessee. Though There Is No Satisfactory Explanation For The Inordinate Delay Of 1018 Days In Filing The Appeal, Since We Are Inclined To Take Up The Main Appeal Itself For Consideration & To Ascertain As To Whether Any Substantial Question Of Law Arises For Consideration, We Exercise Discretion & Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal. For Such Reason, The Application Being Ia No.:Ga/1/2022 Is Allowed.

condone the delay in filing the appeal. For such reason, the application being IA No.:GA/1/2022 is allowed. 2 ITAT/241/2022 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 6th September, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `C’ Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in I.T.A