UNICORN DEALTRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE (CPC), , BENGALURU

Appeal are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

sections": [ "143(1)", "250", "154" ], "issues": "Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on grounds of delay without considering the reasons for delay and the merits of the case. Whether a short delay in filing an appeal, caused by pursuing a rectification remedy, should be condoned

AVISHI PROJECTS LLP ,KOLKATA vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE. , BANGALORE

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

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

section 5 is proved, the application must not be thrown out or any delay cannot be refused to be condoned. (h) In O.P. Kathpatia v. Lakhmir Singh AIR 1984 SC 1744, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that if the refusal to condone the delay results in grave miscarriage of justice; it would be a ground to condone the delay

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

HIMADRI VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, (OSD), WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

condoning the delay though appellant has submitted a reasonable cause of delay of 17 days. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in fact, there was a delay of only 17 days in filing of appeal as could be seen from Form-35, the date of service of notice of demand was 20.04.2018 and appeal was filed

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

Section 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

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

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

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

delay in Form 35 by stating that a rectification request under Section 154 was filed, and its outcome affected the timely filing of the appeal. The Tribunal, citing apex court judgments, emphasized that condonation

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 sought

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

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 of delay. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before

KARMICK SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(4),KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal. 8. On merit, the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. Assessing Officer has erred in visiting the assessee with penalty amounting to Rs.6,63,154/- under section

SAHABUDDIN QUADIRI,MURSHIDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-42, MURSHIDABAD, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini[Assessment Year: 2010-11] Sahabuddin Quadiri, Vs Dcit, Saratpally, Chuanpur, Circle-42, Laldighi, 57, Berhampore, R.N.Tagore Road, Berhampore, Murshidabad-742101. Murshidabad-742101. Pan-Aaapq7976P (Assessee) (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 5. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 30.03.2015, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT)-14, SAHABUDDIN QUADIRI [Assessment Year: 2010-11] Kolkata, for the assessment year 2010-11. Grievances raised by the assessee are as follows. (1) That

CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1220/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Cathay Pacific Airways Limited,…………….…Appellant Room No. 14, 3Rd Floor, New Integrated Cargo Terminal, Nscbi Airport, Kolkata-700052 [Pan:Aabcc5644E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…….Respondent (International Taxation), Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Em Bye-Pass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Sm. Archana Gupta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: October 14, 2025 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. The facts in brief are that the appellant is a non-resident company. The appellant is engaged in the business of operation of aircraft in international traffic. For the year under consideration, the appellant filed the return of income within the prescribed due date declaring total Income of Rs. 1,60,62,140/- and a refund

THE PEERLESS GEN. FIN. & INV. CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 879/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2003-04 The Peerless Gen. Fin. & Inv. Co. Ltd…………......…….............................................…………….…….……...Appellant 3, Esplanade East Kolkata – 700 069 [Pan: Aabct 3042 L] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax , Circle-3(1), Kolkata…….…………..……………………..…. Respondent

delay is condoned and appeal admitted. 5. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows:- 6. The first contention of the assessee is that the showcause notice issued by the Assessing

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 879/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2003-04 The Peerless Gen. Fin. & Inv. Co. Ltd…………......…….............................................…………….…….……...Appellant 3, Esplanade East Kolkata – 700 069 [Pan: Aabct 3042 L] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax , Circle-3(1), Kolkata…….…………..……………………..…. Respondent

delay is condoned and appeal admitted. 5. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows:- 6. The first contention of the assessee is that the showcause notice issued by the Assessing

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

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

condone delay would result in 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.” 3. In the present case

ITO(EXEMPTION),WARD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SURESH AMIYA MEMORIAL TRUST, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

Section 12(1)(b) of the Act were violated. The Revenue has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd. [arising in SLP (Civil) No. 7620/2021] dated 11th July, 2022. The ld. CIT (A) allowed the relief to the assessee and the relevant extract from the order