M/S. JEEVANDARSHI MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 509/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 M/S. Jeevandarshi Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Kolkata 4Th Floor Vs 9, India Exchange Place Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaacj8585A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, A/R Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/11/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 23/08/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2019-2020. 2. The Sole Issue Raised By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer Wherein The Assessing Officer Had Disallowed The Carry Forward Of Business Loss Of Rs.72,96,597/- On The Ground That The Return Was Filed On 01/11/2019 Whereas The Due Date Of Filing Was On 31/10/2019. 3. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income On 01/11/2019 Declaring Total Loss At Rs.72,96,596/-. The Same Was Processed By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru U/S 143(1) Of The Act Vide Intimation Dt. 30/04/2020, Wherein The Claim Of The Assessee Of Carry Forward Of Loss To Subsequent Year Was Rejected On The Ground That The Return Was Filed On 01/11/2019. 4. Aggrieved The Assesse Carried The Matter In Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A). The Ld. Cit(A) Simply Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee By

02 AM on 01.12.2014. Accordingly, Assessing Officer computed income of the assessee by denying the deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act even though the Assessing Officer has quantified allowable deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act, made disallowance u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act, disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act, disallowance of business promotion expenses. Apart from these

M/S SIKAR ZILLA WELFARE TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm M/S Sikar Zilla Welfare Income Tax Officer, Trust Ward 1(3), Exempt 1A, Sikar Bhawan, Vs. Ashutosh Dey Lane, Kolkata-400071 Kolkata-700006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadts3808D Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Gautam Patra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.08.2024

delay in filing of audit report in form 10B. 02. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the return of income has been filed within M/s Sikar Zilla Welfare Trust; A.Y. 2018-19 the prescribed time limit under Section 39(1) of the Act. Though, the audit was duly carried out by the auditors before filing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

02. At the outset, we note that the Cross Objection of assessee in CO No.42 to 45/KOL/2025 are barred by limitation by 167 days for which condonation petitions were filed before the tribunal praying for the condoning the delay. On perusal of the condonation petitions and the reasons stated for delay in filing the appeals, we find that reasons

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

02. At the outset, we note that the Cross Objection of assessee in CO No.42 to 45/KOL/2025 are barred by limitation by 167 days for which condonation petitions were filed before the tribunal praying for the condoning the delay. On perusal of the condonation petitions and the reasons stated for delay in filing the appeals, we find that reasons

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

02. At the outset, we note that the Cross Objection of assessee in CO No.42 to 45/KOL/2025 are barred by limitation by 167 days for which condonation petitions were filed before the tribunal praying for the condoning the delay. On perusal of the condonation petitions and the reasons stated for delay in filing the appeals, we find that reasons

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 4 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

02. At the outset, we note that the Cross Objection of assessee in CO No.42 to 45/KOL/2025 are barred by limitation by 167 days for which condonation petitions were filed before the tribunal praying for the condoning the delay. On perusal of the condonation petitions and the reasons stated for delay in filing the appeals, we find that reasons

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

Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi lain Vs. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575] and State of West Bengal Vs. The Administrator, Howrah Municipality [AIR 1972 SC 749]. It must be remembered that in every case of delay there can be some lapse on the part

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

02, 2024 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 1 B.P. Poddar Hospital & Medical Research Ltd. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 17th August, 2023 passed for assessment year 2016-17. 2. The Registry

KAIZEN INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 29, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 485/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Kaizen Industries,………….………………………Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan:Aaefk2373E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,……..Respondent Circle-29, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ankur Goyal, Jcit, Sr. D.R. Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 29, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 02, 2024 O R D E R

02, 2024 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 1 Kaizen Industries National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 28th February, 2024 passed for assessment year 2018-19. 2. The appeal of the assessee before

A B CAPITAL,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 32, , KOLKATA

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

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

condoned, the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merit after hearing the parties. 3. 'Every day's delay must be explained' does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, ………………………………” 1.1. Considering the reasons advanced for justifying the said delay, this appeal is admitted for adjudication. I.T.A

GULMOHAR DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-9(2), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2009-10

condone the delay and take up the matter for appropriate adjudication. 4. This case was heard on 16.11.2022 and order was reserved. However, certain clarifications were required for which it was refixed for hearing. Ld. Sr. DR was directed to produce assessment records including relating to the assessment carried out under section

PANDAVESWAR COLLIERY EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

02-April-2026 Date of pronouncing the order : 17-April-2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-Bhubaneswar [hereinafter referred to as Ld. ‘Addl/JCIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2019-20 dated

KRISHNA WEB TECH (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD -7(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 334/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Krishna Web Tech (P) Limited,..................Appellant 90, Burtolla Street, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700007 [Pan: Aadck7958H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-7(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 8Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhrajyoyi Bhattacharjee, Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 28, 2023 O R D E R

02, 2023 Date of pronouncing the order : February 28, 2023 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kolkata dated 30.11.2017 passed for Assessment Year 2012-13. 1 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Krishna Web Tech (P) Limited

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CENTURY ENKA LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

condone the delay and admit the revenue’s appeal for hearing. 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal of revenue is that with regard to the allowance of leave encashment of Rs.1,47,66,197/-. 4. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) had allowed

CENTURY ENKA LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

condone the delay and admit the revenue’s appeal for hearing. 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal of revenue is that with regard to the allowance of leave encashment of Rs.1,47,66,197/-. 4. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) had allowed

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BRG IRON AND STEEL COMPANY PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Dcit, Circle-(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Brg Iron & Steel Company Pvt. Ltd. Suit No.402,403,404, Plot No.5, Block-Dp, Salt Lake Sector-5, Godrej Waterside Building, Kol. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccb2175L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are as follows: “01. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 20624601/- on account of estimated net profit? 2 M/s. BRG Iron

RECKITT DENCKISER (INDIA) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas Appeals of the revenue are dismissed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.404/Kol/2015 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.625/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2011-12)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for hearing on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as facts narrated in ITA No. 625/Kol/2016

M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (I) PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas Appeals of the revenue are dismissed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.404/Kol/2015 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.625/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2011-12)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for hearing on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as facts narrated in ITA No. 625/Kol/2016

DCIT, CIR-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RECKITT BENCKISER (I) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas Appeals of the revenue are dismissed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.404/Kol/2015 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.625/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2011-12)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for hearing on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as facts narrated in ITA No. 625/Kol/2016