BANI BROTO BANERJEE ,KOLKATA vs. CIT(A), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 520/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Bani Broto Banerjee,…………………..…………Appellant Sanskriti, Flat – 3A, 148, Rashbehari Avenue, Near Deshapriya Park, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Abppb0424P] -Vs.- Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals),……Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Ranu Bisws, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 24, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 O R D E R

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 3. The assessee has taken three grounds of appeal, out of which Ground No. 2 is the substantial ground of appeal. In this ground, the grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the order of ld. Assessing Officer vide which deduction of interest

HARSHAD MANSUKHLAL SHAH. ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CIR-29,KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 948/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Harshad Mansukhlal Shah Acit, Circle-29, Kolkata 1208, C2 Wing Sheetal Nath Vs Gordia Nagar, Kurla Mumbai - 700077 [Pan : Alops0164Q] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Swapan Kumar Bera, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 10/12/2021, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 577 Days. On The Last Date Of Hearing I.E., 21/03/2024, The Bench After Considering The Condonation Application & Other Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Has Condoned The Delay In Filing Of The Instant Appeal Vide Its Order Dt. 21/03/2024, Which Forms Part Of The Record. Thus, We Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erred In Accepting The View Of The Ao That The Disclosed Short-Term Capital Gain Of Rs. 18,67,181/- As Business Income Of Rs. 18,67,181/-.

condoned the delay in filing of the instant appeal vide its order dt. 21/03/2024, which forms part of the record. Thus, we proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is erred in accepting the view

SKYBRIDGE REAL ESTATES LLP,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Skybridge Real Estates Llp Dcit, Circle -34, 24, Hemant Basu Sarani, Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, 110, Mangalam-A, 5Th Floor, Room Shanti Pally, E.M. Bypass, Vs. No.507, Kolkata-700001, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acvfs7139R Assessee By : Shri N.S. Saini, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2024

capital gains was declared. He observed that statute did not reject or frown upon conversion of stock in trade into investment and the said conversion was permissible. Commissioner (Appeals) referred to the Circular No. 4/2007 dated 15th June, 2007 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, which stipulates that two portfolios one for stock in trade

M/S. B.L. TAK AND SONS (HUF),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 34(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

condone the delay of four days for filing the appeal. 3 I.T.A. No.2622/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2014-15 M/s B.L. Tak & Sons (HUF) 4. Brief fact of the case is that the assessee is a Hindu Undivided Family. During the impugned assessment year, the assessee set off a loss amount of Rs. 54,19,374/-. The assessee filed the return

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7(1) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

condone the delay and proceed to admit the cross objection for hearing. 3. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as in ( facts in deleting the adjustment made by the AO/TPQ amounting

BHARAT PRADHAN,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD-3(3) , DARJEELING

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 87/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Bharat Pradhan, ...................................Appellant Chandra Bhawan, Bloomfield Cess Road, Dali, Darjeeling-734101, West Bengal [Pan: Aenpp6778B] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,..............................Respondent Ward-3(3), Darjeeling, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, A.J.C. Bose Road, P.O. & Dist. Darjeeling, Pin-734101 Appearances By: Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 16, 2023 O R D E R

condone the delay. We proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 6. The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal. However, his whole grievance revolves around a single issue namely, ld. Assessing Officer has erred in determining the long-term capital gain

MICRO CAPITALS PVT. LTD. ,THANE vs. DCIT,C.C-4(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, J & Dr. Manish Borad

condone delay would result foreclosing a suitor from putting forth his cause. There is no presumption that delay in approaching the court is always deliberate. This Court has held that the words "sufficient cause" under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi lain Vs. Kuntal Kumari

SRI SNEHASISH BHAUMIK,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-17, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit.\n\n07. The only issue raised by the assessee is against the revisionary order passed u/s 263 of the Act, which is completely arbitrary, unjustified and illegal and prayed to be quashed.\n\n08. The facts in brief are that the assessment order u/s 143(3) came

KANOI TEA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. P.C.I.T. - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

gain anything from delaying this appeal. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N.Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy (supra) has observed that period of delay does not matter. It is the I.T.A. No. 18/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Kanoi Tea Private Limited 6 quality of the explanation. If some valid reason

SANJAY KUMAR SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

capital gains or addition 7 Sanjay Kumar Singh, AY: 2020-21. under the head income from other sources. It is apparent from the statement of facts filed in Form No. 35 that the assessee had entered into a development agreement in respect of property for which joint development agreement and power of attorney etc. were filed. Regarding delay in filing

RINA RAY,SILIGURI vs. ITO, WARD 3(2),, DARJEELING

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2262/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Rina Ray,………….………………….………...……Appellant C/O. Amit Kumar Ray, St. Josoph School Road, Matigara, Siliguri-734010, West Bengal [Pan:Bhipr4602M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-3(2), Darjeeling, 27/19, Ajc Bose Road, Near Lal Kuthi, P.O. & P.S. Darjeeling, Darjeeling-734101, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Sujit Basu, Advocate & Shri Rajib Mukherjee, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 31, 2025 O R D E R

capital gain computed at Rs.16,86,124/-, the ld. Assessing Officer determined the addition of Rs.15,63,999/- to the total income of assessee u/s. 45 of the Act. Finally, ld. Assessing Officer assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs.17,88,619/- [income as per return of income filed (comprising LTCG of Rs.1,22,125/- plus other income

ASSISTENT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. NIRMAL CHAND SONI, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The present appeals arise from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act’), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax CO No. 42/Kol/2024 Nirmal Chand Soni (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereafter ‘the Ld. CIT(A), dated 12.02.2024. In this case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. TIRUPATI NIRYAT PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Am Dcit, Central Circle-1(1), O/O The Dcit, Central Circle 1(1) Tirupati Niryat Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata, Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, 145, Rash Behari Avenue, Vs. 110, Shantipally, Em By Pass Kolkata-700029, West Bengal Pin-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct4058P Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

delay is hereby condoned Tirupati Niryat Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2012-13 03. Brief facts of the case are that assessee had filed return of income on 29.09.2012 declaring NIL income. Carried forward loss of Rs. 1,56,15,948/- was shown in the return. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS. The assessee Company is engaged

DEEPAK SWITCH GEARS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd….…......................…...……………....Appellant 48/6, Suman Villa, 2Nd Floor, 155, Jessore Road, Kolkata-700055. [Pan: Aabcd1131H] Vs. Pcit, Asansol….....….........................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 158 Days. A Separate Application Of Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Wherein, It Has Been Pleaded That After Receipt Of The Impugned Order Of The Pr. Cit, The Assessee, Through Its Director, Shri Deep Kishan Saraf, Immediately Approached One Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Chartered

gain anything by making an appeal time barred. Therefore, such a step can never be taken at the end of the assessee to delay the disposal of the appeals. The demand has already been raised against the assessee and it is an adverse order against it unless it is deleted, no benefit would be there to the assessee. Therefore

B P PODDAR HOSPITAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 5(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 714/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 B.P. Poddar Hospital & Medical Research Ltd.,…………………………………………Appellant 18, Rabindra Sarani, Poddar Court, 9Th Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aaccb1618G] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..Respondent Circle-5(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri A.K. Meena, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R. Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: July 01, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 02, 2024 O R D E R

gain anything by making the appeal time barred. It has not adopted a delaying tactics to litigate with the Department. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to decide it on merit. 8. With the assistance of ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out that the ld. CIT(Appeals

BIRENDRANATH SAMANTA,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIR-2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 227/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Birendra Nath Samanta Assistant Commissioner Of Anandapally, Sripally Vs Income Tax, Cirlce-2, Burdwan Burdwan - 713103 [Pan : Akaps8240C] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 12/05/2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 253 Days In Filing Of This Appeal. In The Condonation Application, The Assessee Stated That An Affidavit & An Application Has Been Filed Wherein It Has Been Submitted That The Impugned Order Was Passed On 12/05/2022 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Ex-Parte. The Said Appellate Order Was Sent Through E- Mail At Debudan1975@Gmail.Com, Which Belonged To Shri Debabrata Dan, A Resident Of Burdwan & Looking After The Income Tax Matters

gain anything from delaying this appeal. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N.Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy (supra) has observed that period of delay does not matter. It is the I.T.A. No. 227/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Birendra Nath Samanta 5 quality of the explanation. If some valid reason is there

SHRI VANILA VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 230/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Shri Vanila Vinimay Pvt. Limited,............Appellant C/O. S.L. Poddar & Company, E-3A, Kanti Chandra Road, Bani Park, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302016 [Pan: Aaccv4577A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,................................Respondent Ward-1(3), Kolkata Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 07, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 10, 2023 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz):- The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Kolkata Dated 10.01.2018 Passed For Assessment Year 2008- 09. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 1516 Days. Before Adverting To The Application For Condonation Of Delay, We Deem It Appropriate To Make Reference Of Certain Facts. 1 Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Shri Vanila Vinimay Pvt. Limited

capital by issue of 2,50,770 no. of shares to twenty-seven applicants with face value Rs.10/- and premium of Rs.490/-. The ld. Assessing Officer has issued a notice on 02.12.2013 under section 142(1), but it remained un-complied with. He again issued notice on 16.12.2013. Nobody attended before the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer thereafter

BABA IRON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-9(1), KOLKATA., KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

gain time then the court should lean against acceptance of the explanation. While condoning delay the Could should not forget the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he is a looser and he too would have incurred quiet a large litigation expenses. It would be a salutary guideline that when courts condone the delay