ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumar

u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short, “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In short, “the Ld. CIT(A)] for the A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016- 17 respectively. Since these appeals relating to same assessee and are involving common issues, therefore, these are being disposed of by this

JIA MONGRI SANGMA,NONGALBIRA vs. ITO, SHILLONG

In the result, the quantum appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes and the penalty appeals are allowed with the\nabove observation

u/s 144/ 144B of the Income-tax Act,\n1961 (the Act) vide order dated 23.12.2022, when the assessee\nfailed to make any compliance before the Id. AO. The Id. Counsel for\nthe assessee submitted that in the appellate proceedings the Id. CIT\n(A) did not condone the delay of 312 days of filing the appeal and\ndismissed the appeal

DEBEN THAOSEN,HAFLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SILCHAR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Sainiassessment Year :2014-15 Deben Thaosen V/S. Income Tax Officer Sengya Sombudhan Raji Ward-1, Silchar Room Sarkari Bagan, Halflong, No.21 Aayakar N.C. Hills, Assam Bhawan, Pwd Road, [Pan No.Aedpt 9417 R] Silchar-788001 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri M.C Omi Ningshen, Jcit Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-12-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13-12-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Bemch:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Shillong’S Order Dated 25.06.2018 Passed In Case No.Cit(A)/Shillolng/10040/2017-18 Involving Penalty Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case Called Twice. None Appears At The Assessee’S Behest. Heard Learned Departmental Representative. 2. For The Reasons Stated In Assessee’S Condonation Petition / Affidavit Dated 15.04.2019 Coupled With His Medical History & On Account Of The Revenue’S No Objection, We Condone The Impugned Seventeen Days Delay In Filing Of The Taxpayer’S Appeal. The Same Is Now Taken Up For Adjudication On Merits.

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. Heard learned departmental representative. 2. For the reasons stated in assessee’s condonation petition / affidavit dated 15.04.2019 coupled with his medical history and on account of the Revenue’s no objection, we condone

MOHAMMED HELALUDDIN AHMED,HOJAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD, NAGAON

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

penalty was levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act vide order dated 26.08.2022 by the ITO, Ward-Nagaon. 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjay Jha represented on behalf of the Revenue. 3. It was submitted by the ld. DR that the order of the ld. CIT (A) is an ex-parte order. A perusal

MOHAMMED HELALUDDIN AHMED,DANKIGAON, GOPAL NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD, NAGAON

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

penalty was levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act vide order dated 26.08.2022 by the ITO, Ward-Nagaon. 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjay Jha represented on behalf of the Revenue. 3. It was submitted by the ld. DR that the order of the ld. CIT (A) is an ex-parte order. A perusal

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - TINSUKIA , TINSUKIA vs. RINU SINGH L/R OF JOY PRAKASH SINGH , TINSUKIA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessment Year:2014-15 Acit, Circle-Tinsukia Vs. Renu Singh The Legal Heir Of Late Jai Prakash Singh Jasoda Talkies Compound, Digboi-786171 Pan/Gir No. : Ahdps9100M (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

condone the impugned 49 days’ delay in filing of the appeal. The case is therefore taken up for adjudication on merits. Renu Singh Assessment Year:2014-15 3. The Revenue’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal challenges correctness of both the lower authorities action imposing the penalty in issue of ₹61,00,246/- u/s 271

SOFIQUL ISLAM,NORTH LAKHIMPUR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”). For the sake of convenience both of these appeals are being disposed of through a single order. 2. Both these appeals are time barred by 383 days. ITA 33/Gty/2025 (quantum matter) will be taken as a lead case. The assessee has filed a petition seeking condonation

SOFIQUL ISLAM,NORTH LAKHIMPUR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”). For the sake of convenience both of these appeals are being disposed of through a single order. 2. Both these appeals are time barred by 383 days. ITA 33/Gty/2025 (quantum matter) will be taken as a lead case. The assessee has filed a petition seeking condonation

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SEEMA HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the cross objections by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 80/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Potential Vincom Tax, Circle-1, Guwahati Vs Private Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) C.O. No. 22/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Potential Vincom Private Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Central Circle-1, Guwahati Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 6. As the issues involved in all these appeals are identical and inter- related, the same were heard together and are being disposed off by way of this commons order. First of all we shall adjudicate ITA No. 83/Gau/2023 & C.O. No. 24/GTY/2023 AY 2011-12 as lead case. 7. The only

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. POTENCIAL VINCOM (P) LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the cross objections by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 80/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Potential Vincom Tax, Circle-1, Guwahati Vs Private Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) C.O. No. 22/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Potential Vincom Private Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Central Circle-1, Guwahati Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 6. As the issues involved in all these appeals are identical and inter- related, the same were heard together and are being disposed off by way of this commons order. First of all we shall adjudicate ITA No. 83/Gau/2023 & C.O. No. 24/GTY/2023 AY 2011-12 as lead case. 7. The only

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. POTENCIAL VINCOM (P) LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the cross objections by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 80/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Potential Vincom Tax, Circle-1, Guwahati Vs Private Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) C.O. No. 22/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Potential Vincom Private Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Central Circle-1, Guwahati Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 6. As the issues involved in all these appeals are identical and inter- related, the same were heard together and are being disposed off by way of this commons order. First of all we shall adjudicate ITA No. 83/Gau/2023 & C.O. No. 24/GTY/2023 AY 2011-12 as lead case. 7. The only

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATIU vs. MANOHAR MERCHANTS (P) LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the cross objections by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 80/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Potential Vincom Tax, Circle-1, Guwahati Vs Private Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) C.O. No. 22/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Potential Vincom Private Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Central Circle-1, Guwahati Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 6. As the issues involved in all these appeals are identical and inter- related, the same were heard together and are being disposed off by way of this commons order. First of all we shall adjudicate ITA No. 83/Gau/2023 & C.O. No. 24/GTY/2023 AY 2011-12 as lead case. 7. The only

LALTHANGVELI PACHUAU,AIZAWL vs. ITO W-1 SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Assessment Order & Penalty Orders As Under:

271(1)(c) 18.08.25 42 days Penalty of Rs. 50,88,576/- A.Y. 2015-16 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information with the income tax department the assessee has deposited substantial amount of cash in his savings bank accounts in SBI Madame Cama Road, Mumbai but did not file return of income

LALTHANGVELI PACHUAU,AIZAWL vs. ITO W-1 SILCHAR , SILCHAR

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Assessment Order & Penalty Orders As Under:

271(1)(c) 18.08.25 42 days Penalty of Rs. 50,88,576/- A.Y. 2015-16 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information with the income tax department the assessee has deposited substantial amount of cash in his savings bank accounts in SBI Madame Cama Road, Mumbai but did not file return of income

LALTHANGVELI PACHUAU,AIZAWL vs. ITO W-1 SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Assessment Order & Penalty Orders As Under:

271(1)(c) 18.08.25 42 days Penalty of Rs. 50,88,576/- A.Y. 2015-16 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information with the income tax department the assessee has deposited substantial amount of cash in his savings bank accounts in SBI Madame Cama Road, Mumbai but did not file return of income

LALTHANGVELI PACHUAU,AIZAWL vs. ITO W-1 SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Assessment Order & Penalty Orders As Under:

271(1)(c) 18.08.25 42 days Penalty of Rs. 50,88,576/- A.Y. 2015-16 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information with the income tax department the assessee has deposited substantial amount of cash in his savings bank accounts in SBI Madame Cama Road, Mumbai but did not file return of income

JIA MONGRI SANGMA,NONGALBIRA vs. ITO, SHILLONG

In the result, the quantum appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the penalty appeals are allowed with the above observation

Bench: Shriduvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

penalties were levied u/s 271 AAC(i) & 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment has been framed by the ld. AO u/s 144/ 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) vide order dated 23.12.2022, when the assessee ITA Nos. 441, 442& 443/GTY/2025 JiaMongriSangma

JIA MONGRI SANGMA,NONGALBIRA vs. ITO, SHILLONG

In the result, the quantum appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the penalty appeals are allowed with the above observation

Bench: Shriduvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

penalties were levied u/s 271 AAC(i) & 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment has been framed by the ld. AO u/s 144/ 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) vide order dated 23.12.2022, when the assessee ITA Nos. 441, 442& 443/GTY/2025 JiaMongriSangma