AMALENDU KUMAR MODAK,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , 50(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18 Amalendu Kumar Modak, Income Tax Officer, 50(1), Karer Ganga, Laha Bagan, Garia, Income Tax Office, Civil Centre, Vs Garia Main Road, Kolkata-700084, Uttarapan Complex, West Bengal Manicktala, Kolkata-700 067, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aekpm9399G Present For: Appellant By : Shri Indranil Banerjee, Ar Respondent By : Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2024 O R D E R Per Rakesh Mishra: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld. Cit (A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Ay 2017-18 Dated 14.11.2024, Which Has Been Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 147 Read With Section 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 29.05.2023. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

section 144B of the Act, dated 29.05.2023. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: “A. Grounds concerning dismissal of the Appeal, consequent upon the rejection of Condonation Petition , duly presented with regard to delayed filing of Appeal . A1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

delay is hereby condoned and the Revenue’s appeal is also admitted for adjudication along with the assessee’s. I

PRAMOD LAKRA DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. URVASHI SAREES PVT. LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

delay is hereby condoned and the Revenue’s appeal is also admitted for adjudication along with the assessee’s. I

ANUPAMA VINTRADE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 10(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2015-16 Anupama Vintrade Pvt. Ltd..….……………………….……….……….……Appellant 77, 4Th Floor, Room 422, Elliot Road, Kol-700016.. [Pan: Aahca5675R] Vs. Ito, Ward-10(2), Kolkata….……………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.03.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 14 Days. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee being a domestica company filed its return of income for the A.Y 2015-16 on Anupama Vintrade Pvt. Ltd 11.03.2016 declaring total income of Rs.23,32,310/-. The said

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SURESH KUMAR BANTHIA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross\nObjection of the assessee is partly allowed

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeal for hearing.\n3.\nThe issue raised by the Revenue in ground no.1 is against the order\nof Id. CIT (A) annulling the assessment framed u/s 147 of the\nIncome-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) by the Id. AO on the ground of being\ninvalid and void ab initio without considering the facts

QUALITY BAGS EXPORTERS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CC-IV, KOL, KOLKATA

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos. 2787 To 2790/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2001-02,2002-03,2003-04 & 2004-05

148 was issued as the matter was open before CBDT for reconsideration of the aforesaid clarification. “ 3. In all the assessment years similar observations were made and assessments were concluded by the AO by observing as follows :- “Taxation Laws Amendment Bill-II of 2008 has brought an amendment to section 80HHC with retrospective effect wherein enhance deduction u/s.80HHC on sale

ACIT, CIRCLE-7.1, KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

condone delay) and termination of proceedings by the Court or Tribunal. In so far as extension of time for taking action by the statutory authorities was concerned, the Legislature itself had stepped in by enacting TOLA and authorizing issue of notifications thereunder. As it turned out, no notification was issued under TOLA to apply in a case such

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

condone delay) and termination of proceedings by the Court or Tribunal. In so far as extension of time for taking action by the statutory authorities was concerned, the Legislature itself had stepped in by enacting TOLA and authorizing issue of notifications thereunder. As it turned out, no notification was issued under TOLA to apply in a case such

ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-7(1),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

condone delay) and termination of proceedings by the Court or Tribunal. In so far as extension of time for taking action by the statutory authorities was concerned, the Legislature itself had stepped in by enacting TOLA and authorizing issue of notifications thereunder. As it turned out, no notification was issued under TOLA to apply in a case such

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. HI TECH SYSTEMS AND SERVICES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

condone delay) and termination of proceedings by the Court or Tribunal. In so far as extension of time for taking action by the statutory authorities was concerned, the Legislature itself had stepped in by enacting TOLA and authorizing issue of notifications thereunder. As it turned out, no notification was issued under TOLA to apply in a case such

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA vs. SHIVRASHI VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is hereby treated as allowed

delay is hereby condoned.\n3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee has filed its return of income for AY 2013-14 declaring total income “Nil”. The return was duly processed and an order was passed u/s 143(3) assessing total income of Rs.16,010/- with income tax liabilities of Rs.4,950/-. The case

SUDHA SURANA,NEW DELHI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 61(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Ito Ward-61(3) Bamboo Villa, Sudha Surana Central Revenue Building, C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, 169, A.J.C. Bose Road, F-26/124, Sector 7, Rohini, Vs. New Delhi-110085 Kolkata-700014, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Adepb5526F Assessee By : Dr. Kapil Goel, Ar Revenue By : Shri H. Robindro Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2025

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 05. The legal issue raised by the assessee is against the invalid reopening of assessment u/s 147 read with section 148

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both\nthe appeals of the revenue are dismissed

condone delay) and termination of proceedings by the\nCourt or Tribunal. In so far as extension of time for taking action by\nthe statutory authorities was concerned, the Legislature itself had\nstepped in by enacting TOLA and authorizing issue of notifications\nthereunder. As it turned out, no notification was issued under TOLA to\napply in a case such

JIYA EXIM PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 5(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay is for reasonable\ncause and is accordingly, condoned.\n3. The issues raised in Ground No. 1 is against the order of Ld. CIT(A)\nsetting aside the assessment to the file of the AO instead of quashing re-\nopening of assessment as the approval u/s 151 of the Act is mechanical\nin nature and not in accordance with

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. GAURAV ROSE REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

condone one day’s delay in filing of the Revenue’s appeal ITA No.2396/Kol/2019. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. The Revenue’s twin substantive grounds raised in respect to the instant appeal inter alia plead that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in quashing the Assessing Officer’s action initiating

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

condone the delay in the interest of justice and decide all these appeals on merit. 7. Earlier these appeals were disposed of on the ground that the tax effect by virtue of relief given by the ld. CIT(Appeals) is less than the monetary limit. However, Revenue has filed Miscellaneous Applications bearing Nos. 86 to 120/KOL/2023. It was pleaded

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

condone the delay in the interest of justice and decide all these appeals on merit. 7. Earlier these appeals were disposed of on the ground that the tax effect by virtue of relief given by the ld. CIT(Appeals) is less than the monetary limit. However, Revenue has filed Miscellaneous Applications bearing Nos. 86 to 120/KOL/2023. It was pleaded

DCIT,CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THARUR BHASKARAN, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

condone the delay in the interest of justice and decide all these appeals on merit. 7. Earlier these appeals were disposed of on the ground that the tax effect by virtue of relief given by the ld. CIT(Appeals) is less than the monetary limit. However, Revenue has filed Miscellaneous Applications bearing Nos. 86 to 120/KOL/2023. It was pleaded

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

condone the delay in the interest of justice and decide all these appeals on merit. 7. Earlier these appeals were disposed of on the ground that the tax effect by virtue of relief given by the ld. CIT(Appeals) is less than the monetary limit. However, Revenue has filed Miscellaneous Applications bearing Nos. 86 to 120/KOL/2023. It was pleaded