PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S ORCHID GRIHA NIRMAN PVT LTD

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Dated January 31, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, Adv. Mr. Asok Bhowmick, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. ..For The Respondent The Court :- We Have Heard Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, Learned Standing Counsel For The Appellant/Revenue Duly Assisted By Mr. Asok

condonation of delay is disposed of. ITAT/108/2021 This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 263A of the Income Tax Act, (the Act) is directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench Kolkata (Tribunal) dated 26th September, 2018 in ITAT/569/Kol/2015 for the assessment year 2006-07. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. EVENT DEVELOPERS PVT LTD

Bench: The Hon’Ble High Court Circuit Bench At Port Blair On 09-01-2025 & Thereafter The File Was Processed For Approval From The Department For Preferring The Appeal.

section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been clearly explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its judgment delivered on 5th December, 2025 in Civil Appeal No.14613 of 2025 ( Shankargir vs. The State of M.P. and another). The appellants/petitioners have referred to a Division Bench of this Court delivered on 19th December, 2025 in MAT/47/2025 (Andaman and Nicobar

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S VISHNU DISTRIBUTORS PVT LIMITED

Bench: The Hon’Ble High Court Circuit Bench At Port Blair On 09-01-2025 & Thereafter The File Was Processed For Approval From The Department For Preferring The Appeal.

section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been clearly explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its judgment delivered on 5th December, 2025 in Civil Appeal No.14613 of 2025 ( Shankargir vs. The State of M.P. and another). The appellants/petitioners have referred to a Division Bench of this Court delivered on 19th December, 2025 in MAT/47/2025 (Andaman and Nicobar

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1 KOLKATA vs. ASISH KUMAR GHOSH

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 1St April, 2022 Appearance :-

condoning the delay of 400 days in filing the appeal. Before the Tribunal, the assessee had filed MA 224/Kolkata/2019 seeking certain clarification in the order passed by the Tribunal dated 2nd August, 2019 deleting the addition of unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The said application was allowed as prayed for. Aggrieved by the same, the revenue

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. ASISH KUMAR GHOSH

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 1St April, 2022 Appearance :-

condoning the delay of 400 days in filing the appeal. Before the Tribunal, the assessee had filed MA 224/Kolkata/2019 seeking certain clarification in the order passed by the Tribunal dated 2nd August, 2019 deleting the addition of unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The said application was allowed as prayed for. Aggrieved by the same, the revenue

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

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

3 South praying for eviction of the respondent herein being the tenant defendant in the title suit on the ground of default in payment of rent and requirement in respect of the suit property comprising of two bed rooms, a separate portion of veranda attached thereto along with kitchen, dining space, bath cum privy having facility of electricity and water

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA vs. SEVEN STAR STEELS LTD

Appeal stands dismissed and the

Bench: :

3) and Section 153A(1). 7 “The counsel appearing for the Department relied on sections 139(5) and 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act read with Circular No. 9 of 2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes to contend that the appellant ought to have made an application for condonation of delay

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S K M KHADIM AND CO

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 17Th July, 2023 Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. …For Appellant The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.12.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Ita/278/Kol/2022 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration : 1. Whether On The Facts Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Tribunal Was Justified In Quashing The Order Under Section 263 Of The Said Act Ignoring The Fact That The Assessing Officer In His Order Under Section 143[3] Read With Section 263 Dated 23.12.2019 Concluded That Rs.3,63,122/- Should Be Added As

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The short issue which falls for consideration is whether the assumption of jurisdiction by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata –1 under Section 263 of the Act was just and proper, more so when the exercise of jurisdiction under the said provision was done for the second 3

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS KOLKATA vs. M/S INDIAN SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION

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 : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. ..For Appellant The Court: We Have Heard Smita Das De, Learned Standing Counsel For Appellant Revenue. The Respondent Has Been Served & An Affidavit Of Service Has Been Filed But None Appears For The Respondent. There Is A Delay Of 44 Days In Filing The Appeal & We Have Perused The Condone Delay Petition & We Find Sufficient Causes Were Shown For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. Hence, The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned. This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25.5.2023 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Ita/480/Kol/2022 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :

condoning the delay in filing the Form 10B of the Act. The learned Tribunal after going through the facts of the case took note of the latter circular issued by the Board in Circular No. 16 of 2022 dated 19-07-2022 issued under Section 119(2)(b) by which the powers delegated to the Principal Chief 3

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL -1 ,KOLKATA vs. RATAN KUMAR SOMANI

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

Section 260A has substantially contributed to the delay in filing the appeals in several cases. We came to understand that in the other States in the matter of filing appeals by the Income Tax Department a separate machinery, has been created in the Income Tax Department, however, in the State of West Bengal it appears that the appeals are filed

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

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 1963 Act) for condoning the delay in filing the Review Application being RVW 2 of 2022. The Review Application arises out of judgment and order dated 19th August, 2019 passed in WP.CT 153 of 2019 by which a judicial review in the form of a writ petition

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BEEKAY STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED

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 is allowed and disposed of. ITAT 177 of 2021 This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 20th November, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA/954/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. The 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 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,KOLKATA vs. M/S. ABA EARTHLINE COMMUNICATIONS LTD

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 1St August, 2022. Appearance:-

condonation of delay is allowed. ITAT/111/2021 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 9th November, 2018, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in I.T.A No. 1141/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. The revenue has raised

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5,KOLKATA vs. AMIT KUMAR JAIN

Bench: :

condonation of delay is allowed. ITAT/113/2022 This appeal by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 28th February, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “SMC” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA No. 2232/Kol/2018 for the assessment year 2014-2015. The revenue has raised the following

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

3 There is a delay of 251 days in filing the appeal. As the explanation offered by the appellant/department is satisfactory, 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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XII, KOLKATA vs. MANOJ MURARKA

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

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, is directed against the order dated 21st May, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No. 1239/Kol/2003 and ITA No.1180/Kol/2003 for the assessment year 1998-99. The appeal was admitted on 28th November, 2011 on the following substantial questions of law: 2 (i) Whether

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