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

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

ZYDUS HEALTHCARE LTD,GANGTOK vs. ACIT, CIR. 3(2), GANGTOK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 139/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healhcare Limited,……..................Appellant (Successor To Zydus Healthcare Sikkim), 4Th Floor, ‘D’ Wing, Zudus Corporate Park, Scheme No. 63, Survey No. 536, Khoraj (Gandhinagar), Nr. Vaishnodevi Circle, Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar, Gujrat-382481 [Pan: Aaacg1895Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim-737101 Appearances By: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, Ca & Sonal Pandey, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 20, 2023 O R D E R

199 ITR 351 (Bom.); (v)Inaroo Ltd. v CIT [1993] 204 ITR 312 (Bom.); 2 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healthcare Limited (vi)Ashok Vardhan Birla v CWT [19941 208 ITR 958 (Bom.); (vii) CIT v Govindram Bros. Pvt. Ltd. [1983] 141 ITR 626 (Bom.). 4. The contention of the assessee for permission to raise additional grounds of appeal

KIRTI AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. CPC TAX OFFICER WARD OFFICER 40(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.24/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22

condone the delay. I.T.A. No. 24/Kol/2024 Kirti Agarwal, AY : 2021-22 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in not directing the Centralised Processing Centre (CPC) for granting credit for TDS of INR 75,190 claimed by the appellant in respect of income from salary. 3. The appellant had offered the income from salary of INR 9,51,596 received from

DCIT,CIRCLE-5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. HINDUSTHAN NATIONAL GLASS AND INDUSTRIESLIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as being infructuous

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. Whether on the feats and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs 4,74,22,91l/- (3,94,98,436 +7924473) made

M/S IMPEX FERRO TECH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.CI.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 1521/KOL/2019: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 55,22,53,107/- by recording a finding that

D.CI.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S IMPEX FERRO TECH LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 1521/KOL/2019: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 55,22,53,107/- by recording a finding that

THE EXECUTOR TO THE ESTATE OF SUKHENDU PRASAD CHOUDHURY,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 29, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

delay is hereby condoned in the interest of substantive justice. 2. In this case, the Assessing Officer, CPC (hereinafter referred to as ld. 'AO') is seen to have issued an intimation order dated 22.03.2023 u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act'), in which TDS claim of Rs. 71,583/- was not granted ostensibly because

ITO, WARD-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SARGA HOTEL PVT. LTD. , KOLKATA.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 664/KOL/2023: “1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) Delhi is erred in not considering disallowance made by the AO on account of business expenditure

SHRINGAR MARKETING PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone the delay and admit this appeal of the assessee. 2. The assessee is a company and had filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2015-16 on 21/09/2015, disclosing total income of Rs.9,54,200/-. The company had issued shares at a premium during the year. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and issued notices

ITO, WARD - 46(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI NAVIN KR. PODDAR, HOWRAH

In the result the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No.1145/Kol/2008 Assessment Year : 2003-04

delay in filing the appeal was due to a reasonable and sufficient cause and the same is accordingly condoned. 3. Ground No.1 raised by the revenue reads as follows :- “That the Id. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs 32812090/- . He simply took the remand report in distorted form and erroneously deleted the addition without going through merit

HILL QUEEN INVESTMENT PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Hill Queen Investment (P) Ltd...……………………....................................……………..…….............Appellant Surobala Apartments Flat No. 202 3Rd Floor Block-B Rekhjuani, Bhatinda Rajarhat Kolkata – 700 135 [Pan : Aaacj 2324 P] Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -2, Kolkata..................…………...............................…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Devi Sharan Singh, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 6Th, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 21St, 2021 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’), Dt. 20/03/2020, For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. There Is A Delay Of 223 (Two Hundred Twenty Three) Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee. After Perusing The Petition For Condonation For Delay, We Are Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause In Filing The Appeal In Time. Hence, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal. 3. The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Disclosing Total Income Of Rs.20,40,470/- On 28/09/2015. The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny For The Following Reasons:- “(I) Mismatch In Sales Turnover Reported In Audit Report & Itr (Ii) Mismatch In Amount Paid To Related Persons U/S 40A(2)(B) Reported In Audit Report & Itr (Iii) Suspicious Sale Transaction In Shares (Penny Stock Tab In Its)”

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The assessee is a company and filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2015-16, disclosing total income of Rs.20,40,470/- on 28/09/2015. The case was selected for limited scrutiny for the following reasons:- “(i) Mismatch in sales turnover reported in Audit Report and ITR (ii) Mismatch in amount

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BRGD SPONGE & IRON PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal\nof the assessee is allowed

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.\n3.\nThe common issue raised in all the grounds raised by the Revenue is\nagainst the order of Id. CIT (A) partly deleting the addition to the\nextent of ₹2,18,15,000/- as made by the Id. AO of ₹2,30,00,000/-\nu/s 68 of the Act in respect

I.T.O, WARD-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SARGA HOTEL PVT. LTD. , SALT LAKE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed\nas infructuous

delay\nis condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.\n2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following\ngrounds of appeal:\ni. ITA No. 664/KOL/2023:\n“1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) Delhi\nis erred in not considering disallowance made by the AO on account of\nbusiness

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KKALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.452/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata Vs Kkalpana Industries India Ltd. 2B, Pretoria Street, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aabck 2239 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 13.11.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070338584(1), For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Ms. Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. A Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Find That The Appeal Of The Revenue Has Been Filed Belatedly By 28 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Thus, The Delay Of 28 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

delay of 28 days in filing the appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing. 2 4. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that he was invoking his liberty under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 in regard to the issue which has been held against the assessee

NARAYAN SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

delay of 28 days in filing the\npresent appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for\nhearing.\n4. It was submitted by the Id. AR that as per the AO, the assessee had\nmade investments in allegedly three penny stock companies, namely, JMD\nTelefilms Industries Limited, Unisys Softwares & Holding Industries Ltd.\nand Nouveau Global Ventures Limited

M/S KAUSHALYA INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CO LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CC - XVIII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

condone the said delay and proceed to hear the case on merits. 3. The only effective issue that is to be decided is whether the CIT-A justified in confirming the disallowance of Rs.91,03,353/- for the A.Ys 2008-09 and 2009-10 made u/s. 35D of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case. For convenience

DCIT, CIR. 11(1), KOLKATA vs. TIRUPATI SUGARS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is Partly Allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

condone the delay and proceed to admit the appeal for hearing. 2 AY: 2012-13 Tirupati Sugars Ltd. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is limited company engaged in manufacturing of sugar and its by-product. Current year loss of Rs. 9,81,23,206/- declared in the return of income filed for assessment year