SOCIETY FOR COMMUNITY INTERVENTION & RESEARCH,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), EXEMPTION, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2087/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Society For Community Intervention & Research…....Appellant 2/2, Tiljala Road, Near No.2 Rail Gate, Park Circus Station, Kol-700046. [Pan: Aaatc4285B] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Exemption, Kolkata…..…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ar & Vidhi Ladia, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Susanta Saha & Shri Rajat Datta, Sr. Drs, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 05, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 16, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.08.2024 Of The Cit(Appeals), Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Hyderabad [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That An Intimation Order U/S 143(1) Of The Act Dated 27.03.2019 Was Passed By The Cpc, Bengaluru Denying Exemption U/S 11 To The Assessee On The Ground Of Non-Filing Form 10B In Time Or Before The Filing Of The Return Of Income.

rectification application u/s 154 and condonation of delay application u/s 119(2)(b) which attributed the genuine efforts of the assessee

RAMAKRISHNA RAO,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), ALIPURDUAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

rectification petition u/s. 154 of the Act but the same was not allowed. Thereafter, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who, without going into the merits of the case, dismissed the assessee’s appeal on account of delay of 254 days because the reasons assigned were not sufficient for condonation

L & T FINANCE LIMITED (SUCCESSOR OF L & T INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW MERGED),KOLKATA vs. CIT(A),NFAC,ITD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 13. The Revenue has taken three grounds of appeal, out of that Ground No. 3 is a general ground, which does not call for recording of any specific finding. 14. The rest of the two grounds read as under:- (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

DCIT, KOLKATA vs. L & T FINANCE LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 13. The Revenue has taken three grounds of appeal, out of that Ground No. 3 is a general ground, which does not call for recording of any specific finding. 14. The rest of the two grounds read as under:- (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

SUDHA DHOOT,KOLKATA vs. AO WARD 40 (4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2018-19

delay in filing the appeal is being condoned as the assessee seemed to have erred in following the procedure as per the letter dated 07.02.2024. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has disallowed the amount of Brought Forward losses amounting to Rs.43,97,351/- mentioning that the return

NEETU AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 7(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

rectification order u/s 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 08.08.2022. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: “1 Passing the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act. 1961 ('the Act') which is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2 Dismissing the appeal

TAKDAH LINGDING GPSKUS LTD.,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), DARJEELING

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

154 of the Act dated 31.05.2019. 2. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that ld. CIT(A) did not consider his condonation petition and rejected the ground of delay and dismissing the I.T.A. No.: 211/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Takdah Lingding GPSKUS Limited. appeal only on the point of limitation. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that the Appellant

DREAM RESIDENCY TWINS,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-32, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2588/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Dream Residency Twins,……………..…………Appellant 44/2A, Hazra Road, Kolkata-700013 [Pan:Aagfd1014M] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,……...Respondent Circle-32, Kolkata, Income Tax Officer, 10B, Sir William Jones Sarani, Middleton Row, Park Street Area, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: April 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 30, 2025 O R D E R

condonation petition to justify the said delay, which reads as under:- “The order u/s 143(1) was received on 27.01.2020 and same was handed to our Chartered Accountant (CA) for taking necessary action. We were pursuing alternative remedy through rectification petition u/s 154

ASHRAMA PRAKTAN CHHATRA SANGHA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(4), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Your Lordship For Justice In Connection Of Uphold Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) For The

154 of the Act was to allow condonation of delay in the filing of Form 10 so as to avail the benefit of deduction available to an institution registered u/s 12A of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has recorded in para 2 of the impugned order, that the I.T.A. No. 2063/Kol/2024 Ashrama Praktan Chhatra Sangha rectification

SUVODEEP PYNE,GARIA vs. ITO, WARD 63(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2251&2252/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Suvodeep Pyne…………………..…..……….………….……….……….……Appellant Castle Apt 3B, 129, Garia Main Road, Kamdahari, Garia S.O, W.B-700084.. [Pan: Bbypp8655C] Vs. Ito, Ward-63(1), Kolkata……………………………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Pratim Dutta, Adv. & Sanjana Jha, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S B Chakraborthy, Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 04, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2020-21 Against Separate Orders Both Dated 09.08.2025 Of The Addl/Jcit(A) Kochi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2251/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. Ita No.2251/Kol/2025 – Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In This 2. Case, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Fy-2017-18, Relevant To The A.Y- 2018-19 On 29.08.2018 By Disclosing Gross Total Income Of Rs. 68,85,998/- & Claimed Deduction A Sum Of Ra.7,455/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Disclosed Income From Salary Of

154 of Act and the rectification order passed by CPC dated 14.06.20 disallowing the claim of Rs.14,26,920/- which was covered under DTAA u/s 90/90A of the Act and total Tax liability was determined at Rs.18,10,190/- 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. JCIT wherein the appeal of the assessee

SUVODEEP PYNE,GARIA vs. ITO, WARD 63(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2251&2252/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Suvodeep Pyne…………………..…..……….………….……….……….……Appellant Castle Apt 3B, 129, Garia Main Road, Kamdahari, Garia S.O, W.B-700084.. [Pan: Bbypp8655C] Vs. Ito, Ward-63(1), Kolkata……………………………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Pratim Dutta, Adv. & Sanjana Jha, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S B Chakraborthy, Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 04, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2020-21 Against Separate Orders Both Dated 09.08.2025 Of The Addl/Jcit(A) Kochi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.2251/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts. Ita No.2251/Kol/2025 – Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In This 2. Case, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Fy-2017-18, Relevant To The A.Y- 2018-19 On 29.08.2018 By Disclosing Gross Total Income Of Rs. 68,85,998/- & Claimed Deduction A Sum Of Ra.7,455/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Disclosed Income From Salary Of

154 of Act and the rectification order passed by CPC dated 14.06.20 disallowing the claim of Rs.14,26,920/- which was covered under DTAA u/s 90/90A of the Act and total Tax liability was determined at Rs.18,10,190/- 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. JCIT wherein the appeal of the assessee

BIJENDER SINGH,ALIPURDUAR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), ALIPURDUAR

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 445 To 447/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20, 2021-22 & 2022-23 Bijender Singh Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Vs Alipurduar Advocates Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Dsnps3610C] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit(A)-10, Mumbai (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 20 Days In Filing Of These Appeals. There Is A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein, The Reasons For The Delay. On Perusal Of The Petition, We Are Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented For Reasonable Cause From Filing This Appeal In Prescribed Time Limit. Accordingly, We

rectification application u/s 154 of the Act but failed to get any relief. Thereafter, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the order u/s 143(1) of the Act but there was a delay in filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Though it was claimed that delay was on account of bonafide reasons

BIJENDER SINGH,ALIPURDUAR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), ALIPURDUAR

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 445 To 447/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20, 2021-22 & 2022-23 Bijender Singh Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Vs Alipurduar Advocates Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Dsnps3610C] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit(A)-10, Mumbai (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 20 Days In Filing Of These Appeals. There Is A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein, The Reasons For The Delay. On Perusal Of The Petition, We Are Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented For Reasonable Cause From Filing This Appeal In Prescribed Time Limit. Accordingly, We

rectification application u/s 154 of the Act but failed to get any relief. Thereafter, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the order u/s 143(1) of the Act but there was a delay in filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Though it was claimed that delay was on account of bonafide reasons

BIJENDER SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), ALIPURDUAR

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 445 To 447/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20, 2021-22 & 2022-23 Bijender Singh Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Vs Alipurduar Advocates Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Dsnps3610C] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit(A)-10, Mumbai (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 20 Days In Filing Of These Appeals. There Is A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein, The Reasons For The Delay. On Perusal Of The Petition, We Are Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented For Reasonable Cause From Filing This Appeal In Prescribed Time Limit. Accordingly, We

rectification application u/s 154 of the Act but failed to get any relief. Thereafter, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the order u/s 143(1) of the Act but there was a delay in filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Though it was claimed that delay was on account of bonafide reasons

BCDA MEMBERS BENEVOLENT TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), EXEMPTION, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.787/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Bcda Members Benevolent Trust ………. Appellant (Pan: Aabtb0860C) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Kolkata ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rip Das, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 08.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 24.07.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2020-21 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 07.03.2024 Arising Out Of The Rectification Order Passed U/S 154 Of The Act By Ao, Cpc Dated 26.04.2022. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Read As Under:

rectification order passed u/s 154 of the Act by AO, CPC dated 26.04.2022. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: I.T.A. No. 787/Kol/2024 A Y: 2020-21, BCDA Members Benevolent Trust “1. That the Order in Appeal passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi is unlawful, unwarranted

M/S. RAINA COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condoned on the ground that the delay falls under Covid\nperiod and the reasons for the delay is bona fide and genuine. The ld.\ncounsel for the assessee also submitted that the assessee has uploaded\nall the information and details before the 1d. CIT(A) along with a written\nsubmission and therefore, the order may kindly be passed on merit

CALCUTTA NEW SCHOOL SOCIETY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), EXEMPT, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

rectification\nrequest u/s 154 was filed, since the same was not accepted, the appeal\nagainst the original order could not be filed in time. We note that\nassessee-society is a charitable trust registered u/s 80G of the Act and\ncarrying out charitable activities and the reason for the said delay was\nbeyond the control of the assessee

BILATIBARI TEA COMPANY PVT. LTD.,ISLAMPUR, NORTH DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), JALPAIGURI , JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

rectification order framed u/s 154 of the Act dated 16.05.2015. 1.1. The brief facts of the case of the appellant are that the assessee is a manufacturer of black tea having its own tea garden and factory. The assessee filed its return of income on 01.11.2013 declaring total income of Rs. at Rs. 38,74,130/-. The Assessing Officer (hereinafter