JYOTI RANJAN ROY REPRESENTED BY LIMITED GUARDIAN SUVAJIT ROY ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 50, KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.963/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Jyoti Ranjan Roy Represented By Limited Guardian Suvajit Roy.............................……….……Appellant Block Ac-155, Sector-1, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700064. [Pan:Adlpr2179P] Vs. Acit, Circle-50, Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent I.T.A. No.314/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Jyoti Ranjan Roy ……………………………..............................……….……Appellant Block Ac-155, Sector-1, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700064. [Pan: Adlpr2179P] Vs. Acit, Circle-50, Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent I.T.A. No.261/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Jyoti Ranjan Roy ……………………………..............................……….……Appellant Block Ac-155, Sector-1, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700064. [Pan: Adlpr2179P] Vs. Dcit, Circle-49(1), Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent

condonation of delay. Thesaid Tax Advocate prepared the necessary documents and shared it with the Assessee and the said tax consultant vide an email dated March 11, 2020. The said Tax Advocate also advised that after filing of the instant appeal, an application should be made for hearing the instant appeal along with the appeal being ITA No. 314/Kol/2017 (hereinafter

LOYOLA HIGH SCHOOL,KOLKATA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD - 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

delay stands condoned by the above Circular. Therefore, it is to be treated in time. This exhibits that both conditions are fulfilled. Therefore, accumulation is to be allowed. In view of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed. The ld. Assessing Officer is directed to give benefit under section 11(2) of the Act to the assessee of accumulated

JYOTI RANJAN ROY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,(I.T.) CIR.-50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

condonation of\ndelay.\n16. Your petitioner states that the said tax consultant immediately gave\ndirections to the said Tax Advocate to draft the application for\ncondonation of delay. Thesaid Tax Advocate prepared the necessary\ndocuments and shared it with the Assessee and the said tax consultant\nvide an email dated March 11, 2020. The said Tax Advocate also advised\nthat

M/S B.N. DUTTA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. DCIT, CIR. 2, DURGAPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.705/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S B. N. Dutta ….…………………………………………………..………….……Appellant Head Office: 518, G Road, Sonari West Layout, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand – 831011. [Pan: Aadfb0648J] Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Durgapur……..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. Khasnobis, Ca & None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri H. Robindro Singh, Addl. Cit - Dr & None Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2025 & December 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 13.02.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Indore [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Partnership Firm & Engaged In The Business Of Civil Construction & Maintenance Of Civil Structures Inside Stell Plants. For The Assessment Year 2011-12, The Assessee Filed Its Return On 30.09.2011 By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.36,58,080/- & Total Tax & Cess Liability Of Rs.11,30,347/- Was Discharged In Full Resulting In A Refund Of Rs.12,520/-. The Return Of The Assessee Was Processed By The Cpc U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 27.01.2012. The Assessee Did Not Receive Any Information From The Cpc Either Directly By Way Of Service Of Physical Copy Of The Same Or From The Then Authorised Representative Namely Mr. S. N. Gupta. Due To Non-Receipt Of

17, 2025 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against an order dated 13.02.2024 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Indore [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee

BOUTIQUE DE FLEUR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(2), , 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. 446/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Boutique De Fleur,………………………………..Appellant Lawgical Consultants, 2D, Bentinck Street, Unit No. A, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aajfb1035D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-45(2), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Dheeraj, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 2 Boutique De Fleur 4. The facts in brief are that during the demonetization period (09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016), the assessee-firm deposited cash of Rs.13,18,000/- in its Kotak Mahindra Bank, Minto Park Branch. The assessee was requested vide notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 14.03.2018 to furnish a true and correct return

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file

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

17. This application is made bonafide and for the interest of justice. Under the above facts and Circumstances the Appel lant/Petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to pass the following orders:- (a) Delay of 247 days in preferring the instant appeal be condoned and the aforesaid appeal be registered and restored to file