SANTANU DAS,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-25(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

144B of the Act was completed on 27.09.2022 determining the total assessed income at Rs. 1,00,36,850/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which was delayed by 134 days. The reason seeking condonation of delay was that the assessee had relied on the statement of his Chartered Accountant

DILIP KUMAR PRAMANIK,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

144B of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who noted that there was a delay of 157 days in filing the appeal. He has gone through the judicial pronouncements on condonation of delay. In the course of the appeal, the assessee has stated that the assessee is a senior

DILIP KUMAR PRAMANIK,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

144B of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who noted that there was a delay of 157 days in filing the appeal. He has gone through the judicial pronouncements on condonation of delay. In the course of the appeal, the assessee has stated that the assessee is a senior

DILIP KUMAR PRAMANIK,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

144B of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who noted that there was a delay of 157 days in filing the appeal. He has gone through the judicial pronouncements on condonation of delay. In the course of the appeal, the assessee has stated that the assessee is a senior

DIPANSHU GUPTA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 37(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

condoned the delay in filing the appeals, finding sufficient cause for the assessee being prevented from filing within the statutory time limit. Both the orders of the AO and CIT(A) were set aside, directing the AO to conduct a fresh assessment.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "250", "147", "144", "144B

MD MAHIMUD SK,MALDA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), MALDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condoning the delay of 183 days for which the assessee\nfiled the affidavit before us explaining the delay, the reasons for the\ndelay in filing of the appeal.\n08. The Id. Counsel for the assessee vehemently submitted before us that\nthe assessment framed by the Id. AO u/s 147 read with section 144B

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

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

144B of the Act. 6. Dissatisfied with this order, assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld. CIT(A) and ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal vide order dated 07.02.2023. 7. Dissatisfied with both these orders, assessee came up before the Tribunal. The Registry has pointed out that appeal of the assessee is time barred by 149 days

WESTERN COMMERCIAL CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. PCIT - 9, KOLKATA, AAYKAR BHAVAN DAKSHIN

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

144B of the Act, dated 20.04.2021. 1.1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 577 days. An application along with an affidavit seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee, stating as under: I.T.A. No.: 1202/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Western Commercial Corporation. “We, Western Commercial Corporation, respectfully submit

KAUSHALYA SINGHA,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), SILIGURI

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

144B of the Act dated 27.09.2021. 2. The brief facts of the case of the appellant are that the assessee being a retired Government employee deriving pension and he is engaged in trading I.T.A. No.: 611/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kaushalya Singha. of green tea leaves in the AY 2017-18. It is further alleged that the assessee purchased green

BROADWAY CHARITABLE TRUST,,NADIA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(2) (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes having been remanded to the file of Ld

Bench: Hon'Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Nfac), Delhi, Upholding The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144B For The Assessment Year 2018-19, In Respect Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Said Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Nfac), Delhi, Was Passed & Received By Mail On 11.07.2024. Therefore, The Appeal Should Have Been Instituted Within 60 Days From The Receipt Of Such Order, I.E., On Or Before 09.09.2024. 3. The Appeal Is Being Filed On Or After 05.05.2025, With A Prayer For Condonation Of A Delay Of 236 Days.

delay of 218 days which has been requested to be condoned through an affidavit as under: “1. That an appeal has been preferred by the appellant before Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi, upholding the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144B

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOMANI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

delay of 38 days which is clearly evident from the condonation letter filed by the Income should be dismissed. 2. In this case the Ld. AO is very much aware that original asst. was completed on the basis of selection of the case under scrutiny as per CASS(Large share premium) which is clearly mentioned on first page

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOMANI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

delay of 38 days which is clearly evident from the condonation letter filed by the Income should be dismissed. 2. In this case the Ld. AO is very much aware that original asst. was completed on the basis of selection of the case under scrutiny as per CASS(Large share premium) which is clearly mentioned on first page

SHYAM GREENFIELD DEVELOPER PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was grossly unjustified in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal ex-parte

DIPANSHU GUPTA,HOWWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 37(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeals for adjudication.\n2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following\ngrounds of appeal:\nI.T.A. Nos.: 2448 & 2449/KOL/2024\n Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18\nDipanshu Gupta.\nAY 2015-16\n“1.) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred\nin passing

SKILL DYE CHEM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. Right at the outset, it was brought to our notice that the impugned order was passed by dismissing the appeal on the basis of a Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas (in short ‘DTVSV’) Scheme declaration for this very same assessment year, which was available with the Commissioner

MOURATA DAS,MALDA vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), MALDA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

delay is here by condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee had purchased an immovable property at Rs. 15,88,375/- during the FY 2016-17 relevant to the AY 2017-18 and it is noted from the purchase deed furnished by the assessee that property owned jointly with Shri Tapan Kumar

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA vs. NETAI BHADRA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 2386/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Income Tax Officer,…………………………..……Appellant Ward-50(1), Kolkata, Uttarapan Building, Block-Ds-Ii & Iii, 2Nd Floor, Ultadanga, Kolkata-700054 -Vs.- Netai Bhadra,…………………………………......Respondent 3/2,New Pally, Noapara, Kolkata-700090, West Bengal [Pan:Ahdpb8164C] -And- C.O. No. 8/Kol/2025 (In Ita No. 2386/Kol/2024) Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Netai Bhadra,…………………………………..Cross Objector 3/2,New Pally, Noapara, Kolkata-700090, West Bengal [Pan:Ahdpb8164C] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…Respondent Ward-50(1), Kolkata, Uttarapan Building, Block-Ds-Ii & Iii, 2Nd Floor, Ultadanga, Kolkata-700054

delay is condoned. 5. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income in Form ITR 3 on 31/03/2021 declaring total income at Rs.28,57,690/-. Subsequently, the assessee also filed a revised return of income on 18.09.2021 declaring total income at Rs.22,72,880/-. The said revised return was processed under section

SULEKHA PAL,BANKURA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1),, BANKURA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 04. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as un- der: “For that on the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) erred in pass- ing an ex parte order without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred

S D RAI PRAYAS EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT WARD 50(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2020-21 S D Rai Prayas Educational Trust……………..……….….……….……Appellant Flat No.Ge Building No.11, Brijdham Housing Complex, Canal Street, Vip Road, Shree Bhumi, North 24 Parganas, Kol-700048.. [Pan: Aavts2993M] Vs. Assessment Unit Ward-50(1), Kolkata …………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent

144B of the Act making addition of Rs.77,56,664/-under the head as income from other sources and penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s 270A of the IT Act were also initiated on this issue. 3. Aggrieved by the said intimation order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed as the appeal