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

168 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons that the order of dismissal of the first appellate authority was only sent on email id of the consultant and the assessee had no knowledge whatsoever of the order having been passed and the assessee came to know about the order only when the subsequent

DEEPAK BAJAJ ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 40(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 6. The assessee has assailed the revisionary proceedings u/s 263 of the Act and consequent order as invalid and bad in law as the same are barred by limitation.the assessee has also challenged the order passed u/s 263 of the Act on the ground that the assessment is neither erroneous

ANIL SINGH,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 49(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.531/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Anil Singh Vs Ito Ward-49(1), Kolkata/Nfac 4, Railway Gate, Lalkuthi, Kamarhati, Kolkata Pan No. : Bflps 0954 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Jcit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 29.07.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ld.Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Ld. Sr.Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 168 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Delay, Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Ld. Sr.Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, Delay Of 168 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 4. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That This Is A Case Of Reopening & Issuance Of Notice U/S.148 Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Notice

delay of 168 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 4. It was submitted by the ld. AR that this is a case of reopening and issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act. It was the submission that the notice 2 u/s.148A(b) of the Act came

TRIMINE AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 10(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

168 days for this the assessee has filed condonation petition., which are as follows- 2 I.T.A. No. 908/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Trimline Agencies Pvt.Ltd. “1. That the appeal filed against the aggrieved assessment order was disposed off by the Hon’ble Ld. CIT(A), NFAC vide an order dated 30.08.2023, the same was served on the mail

LAXMIDHAN TRADELINK PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Bench raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law as well as on facts of the case by passing order u/s 250 dated 20/03/2023 dismissing the appeal filed

ANJALI ROY,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-41(3), NADIA, NADIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

168 days from 29.03.2022 to 12.09.2022. It was pertinent to observe that upto the month of May, 2022, Hon’ble Supreme Court has condoned the delay on account of COVID period therefore limitation ought to have been counted by the Registry from May, 2022 to 12.09.2022. If this exercise is being taken out, then almost 60 days would be excluded

SARVOTTAM CAPS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 202/KOL/2021 is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sri Anikesh Banerjee

delay of 37 days is duly condoned and the matter is taken for adjudication. 3. When the matter was called for hearing, none was present on behalf of the assessee. On perusal of the record, we find that the matter was fixed in several dates on Dated 15.02.2022, 06.04.2022, 26.05.2022 and the ld. A/R requested for fixation of the appeal

FATHER LEBLOND TRUST,DARJEELING vs. CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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 in filing the audit report vests with the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) and not with the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal against the order under section 154 dated 05/09/2020 was dismissed. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Rival submissions were heard and the record

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SDR MEGHNATH INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The brief facts of the case of the appellant are that the assessee an Investment Company with investments in various unlisted manufacturing companies. During the relevant Financial Year, share applications amounting to Rs. 8,75,00,000/- were received from various share applicants to whom equity share allotted

DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. ORIENT PAPER & INDUSTRIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

condone the delay and the appeal of revenue is admitted for hearing. 3. The sole ground of appeal of revenue reads as under: “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.12,26,74,120/- regarding warranty expenses made

DCIT, CC-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJESH JAIN, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

delay is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication. First, we take up ITA No. 1006/Kol/2024. 3. Ground no. 1 of the revenue is against the deleting the addition of Rs.4,94,43,275/- in respect of undisclosed sales by the assessee without appreciating the materials brought on record and facts evaluated by the AO in the assessment order

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJESH JAIN, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

delay is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication. First, we take up ITA No. 1006/Kol/2024. 3. Ground no. 1 of the revenue is against the deleting the addition of Rs.4,94,43,275/- in respect of undisclosed sales by the assessee without appreciating the materials brought on record and facts evaluated by the AO in the assessment order

DCIT, MIDDLETONTON ROW vs. BISHNUPUR PUBLIC EDUCATION INSTITUTE, BISHNUPUR

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Bishnupur Public Education Institute Dcit 10B, Middleton Row, 5 Th Floor, Gopeswarpalli, Bishnupur, Vs. Kolkata-700071, West Bengal Bankura-722122, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtb4176D Assessee By : S/Shri S.M. Surana & Sunil Surana & Dipak Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

condoning the delay in filing the form no.10 on 15.11.2018. However, the same was dismissed by the ld. CIT(E) on 20.12.2018. Finally, the ld. AO assessed the income at ₹3,80,90,390/- by rejecting the claim of the assessee u/s 11(2) of the Act. 05. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) allowed the appeal

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-36, KOLKATA vs. M/S ROHIT & CO., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey

condone the delay since there was reasonable cause for the cause of delay and admit both the appeals for hearing on merits. 3. First of all we take up the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue for AY 2009-10. 4. Ground No. 1 of the revenue appeal is against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-36, KOLKATA vs. M/S ROHIT & CO., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey

condone the delay since there was reasonable cause for the cause of delay and admit both the appeals for hearing on merits. 3. First of all we take up the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue for AY 2009-10. 4. Ground No. 1 of the revenue appeal is against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting

ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S FASTFLOW SECURITIES (P) LTD, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 32/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata...................……….........…..........………...…… Appellant Vs. M/S. Fastflow Securities Pvt. Ltd.........…....…….......….....…...…....... Respondent 41, N.S. Kolkata - 70001 [Pan: Aabcf8361P] Appearances By: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri V.K. Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 15Th, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 13Th, 2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Manish Borad, Accounant Member: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 02.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 35 (Thirty Five) Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Impugned Order By Ld. Cit(A) Is Dated 02/09/2020 Which Falls Within The Period Of Pandemic Of Covid-19. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record By Revenue Explaining The Reasons For Delay, Owing To Pandemic Of Covid-19 During That Time. We Note That The Period Of Delay Falls During The Time Of Pandemic Of I.T.A. No. 32/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Fastflow Securities Pvt. Ltd

condone the delay and proceed to admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The Revenue in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer in respect of receipt of Rs.8,31,00,000/- by the assessee company treated by the Assessing Officer as unexplained income of the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AMLUCKIE INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2541 & 2542/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 Dcit, Cc-1(2), Kolkata…………..…....…………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. M/S Amluckie Investment Company Ltd.……………….....……...…..…..Respondent 2Nd Floor, 10 Princep Street, Kolkata-700072. [Pan: Aacca6749H] Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kr. Pati, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 18, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Both Dated 21.07.2025 Of The Cit(A)-20, Kolkata Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2013–14 2015-16 Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arisen From Same Appellate Order, Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. 2. Both The Appeal Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 35 Days & The Revenue Has Filed Separate Petitions For Condonation Of The Delays. After Going Over The Said Petitions, We Find Sufficient Reasons Behind Such Delays & Consequently, The Delays In Filing Both The Appeal Are Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeals On Merits.

delays in filing both the appeal are hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeals on merits. ITA Nos.2541 & 2542/Kol/2025 M/s Amluckie Investment Company Ltd 3. ITA No.2541/Kol/2025 – Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.7,90,470/- The case of the appellant was reopened

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AMLUCKIE INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2541 & 2542/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 Dcit, Cc-1(2), Kolkata…………..…....…………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. M/S Amluckie Investment Company Ltd.……………….....……...…..…..Respondent 2Nd Floor, 10 Princep Street, Kolkata-700072. [Pan: Aacca6749H] Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kr. Pati, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 18, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Both Dated 21.07.2025 Of The Cit(A)-20, Kolkata Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2013–14 2015-16 Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arisen From Same Appellate Order, Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. 2. Both The Appeal Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 35 Days & The Revenue Has Filed Separate Petitions For Condonation Of The Delays. After Going Over The Said Petitions, We Find Sufficient Reasons Behind Such Delays & Consequently, The Delays In Filing Both The Appeal Are Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeals On Merits.

delays in filing both the appeal are hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeals on merits. ITA Nos.2541 & 2542/Kol/2025 M/s Amluckie Investment Company Ltd 3. ITA No.2541/Kol/2025 – Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.7,90,470/- The case of the appellant was reopened