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-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S.EFFERVESCENT COMMERCIAL PVT LTD

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

22 ITAT/104/2021 IA No.GA/1/2021 IA No.GA/2/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA -Versus- M/S. EFFERVESCENT COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD. Appearance: Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, Adv. Mr. Asok Bhowmick, Adv. ...for the appellant. Mr. Vivek Murarka, Adv. Mr. Dibanath Dey, Adv. ...for the respondents. BEFORE

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. CORPORATE ISPAT ALLOYS LTD

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

condonation of delay (IA No.GA/1/2022) stands allowed. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, is directed against the order dated 9th August, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in IT(SS)A Nos.113 & 114/Kol/2017 for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The revenue

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 DULICHAND CHAMPALAL TEXTILE

Accordingly, the appeal fails and dismissed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 9Th January, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Prithu Dhudheria, Adv. …For Appellant. Mr. S.M. Surana, Adv., Adv. ..For Respondent

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. ITAT/253/2022 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 13th May, 2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA/27/KOL/2021 for the assessment year 2013-14. The revenue has raised the following

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

22 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.) 1. There is a delay of 627 days in filing this appeal and the revenue has filed GA 01 of 2020 to condone the delay. The respondent assessees have filed their affidavit-in-opposition objecting to the prayer for condonation. Reply affidavit has been filed by appellant revenue

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL vs. MANINDRA MOHAN MAZUMDAR

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 19Th February, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Saumya Kejriwal, Adv. Ms. A. Rath, Adv. Mr. Navin Mittal, Adv. …For Respondent

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is allowed. This appeal by the department of Income Tax filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 24.01.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Bench, Kolkata in I.T.A. No. 649/KOL/2022 for the assessment year 2013-14. The revenue has raised

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.

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 and found sufficient cause has been shown for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay in filing

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.

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 and found sufficient cause has been shown for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay in filing

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.

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 and found sufficient cause has been shown for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay in filing

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

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

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

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. SAPPHIRE TRADE ASSOCIATES PVT LTD

The appeal is partly allowed and the assessment

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date: 5Th May, 2025 Appearance: Mr. Avra Mazumder, Adv. Ms. Alisha Das, Adv. Mr. Om Prakash Prasad, Adv. Mr. Suman Bhowmik, Adv. Mr. Samrat Das, Adv. Ms. Elina Dey, Adv. Mr. Sourendra Nath Banerjee, Adv. …For Appellants Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. …For Respondent

condone the delay in filing the appeal. GA/1/2025 is allowed. As could be seen from the Memorandum of Appeal as well as the grounds raised in the writ petition, the appellants did not question the order passed under Section 148A(d) as well as the assessment order under Section 147 of the Act on the merits of the matter

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SREI INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE LIMITED

Accordingly the same stands dismissed without

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 24Th May, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Aryak Dutt, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …For Appellant.

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is allowed. This appeal filed by the Income Tax Department under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated May 22

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. SHRI RAMESH PRASAD SAO

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of mining iron ore and manganese. It filed its return of income for the assessment year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2014-15 and the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act by order dated 29th December, 2006. During the course

MANISH BAID vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 22(4) KOLKATA AND ORS

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 13Th December, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv ….For Respondent The Court : - We Have Heard Learned Counsel On Either Side. There Is A Delay Of 163 Days In Filing The Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Explanation Offered By The Petitioner & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & The Application Ga/1/2023 Is Allowed. The Assessee Has Preferred This Appeal Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Ac 1961 Challenging The Order Dated 10.11.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal A Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Itat No. 530/Kol/2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15 & The Order Dated 35 Of 2023 In Ma 7/Kol/2023. The Assessee Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration:

22(4) KOLKATA AND ORS. BEFORE : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 13th December, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee, Adv. …for appellant Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv ….for respondent The Court : - We have heard learned Counsel on either side. There is a delay of 163 days in filing the appeal

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

22. Having regard to the scheme of the Act, there can be no two opinions that the object thereof is to provide to the disputing parties an alternate mechanism by which speedy and expeditious resolution of dispute(s) and/or difference(s) may be had by nominating unbiased adjudicators, called arbitrators. A person, who is free from bias and in whom

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MUKESH SARAOGI (HUF)

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

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

Section 263 could not have been exercised and such power could have been exercised only when the assessing officer failed to conduct an enquiry which is not the case of the assessee before this Court. With regard to under what circumstances the power under Section 263 could be invoked and the parameters to be fulfilled, reliance was placed