ACIT, CIRCLE - 15(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2012-13

condone the impugned delay attributable to various procedural formalities and compilation of records. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. ITA No.1048/Kol/2018 Assessment Year 2012-13 ACIT, Cir-15(1), Kol. Vs M/s ABCI Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Page 2 3. The Revenue’s first substantive grievance reads that the CIT(A) has erred

D.C.I.T., CC - 2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EKO DIAGNOSTIC PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

section 2(22)(e) of the I.T. Act, 1961 intended to tax the beneficial share holder and not necessarily the registered shareholder of the company from which loan or advance is received. I.T.A. No. 159/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Eko Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd. 2 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is justified

ACIT, CIRCLE - 50(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI RANJIT KUMAR SAHA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and cross objection filed by the Assesse, both are dismissed

Bench: Shri S. S. Ravi, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

condone the delay. 3. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee informed the Bench that the assessee does not want to press the cross objection, (CO. No. 40/Kol/2018 arising out of ITA No. 2192/Kol/2017 for the A.Y 2013-14). The ld. DR for the Revenue does not raise any objection. Therefore, we dismiss the Cross Objection filed

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NILACHAL IRON & POWER LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No.1774/Kol/2016 A.Y 2006-07 D.C.I.T, Cir-3(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Nilachal Iron & Power Ltd Pan: Aabcn 5428K (Appellant/Department) (Respondent/Assessee) I.T.A No.1718/Kol/2016 A.Y 2007-08 A.C.I.T, C.C 4(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Nilachal Iron & Power Ltd Pan: Aabcn 5428K (Appellant/Department) (Respondent/Assessee) For The Appellant : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Ld. Sr.Dr For The Respondent : Smt. Shikha Agarwal, Aca, Ld.Ar

condone the impugned delay of 19 days in above referred Revenue’s appeal. 2.1 We now revert back to above referred common issue of the subsidy receipt of Rs. 2,85,42,000/- each deleted in the CIT(A)’s orders is both the assessment years under consideration before us. 3. Both the parties take

DCIT, CIR-8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MS. MINU BUDHIA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed and the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1450/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Circle-8(2), Kolkata -Vs- Ms. Minu Budhia [Pan: Aefpb 5941 N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 2 ITA No.1450/Kol/2015& C.O. No. 128/Kol/2017 Ms. Minu Budhia A.Yr. 2008-09 143(3)/263/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 31.03.2014 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 696 days in filing the cross objection by the assessee before

MANAV KUMAR SARAF,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-37, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-

E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Kolkata dated 23.05.2019. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 199 days on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee has moved

M/S BIRENDRA CHANDRA SAHA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-39, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

delay is to be condoned and we condone the same. 8. Now coming to the merits of the case, challenge is only in respect of the addition made by the ld. CIT under section 263 order to a tune of Rs.95,70,953/-. According to the ld. CIT, the unsecured loan advanced by M/s. Mascot Woodcraft Pvt. Limited

ACIT, CIR-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THE JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Acit, Circle 1(2), Kolkata Vs. The Jute Corporation Of India Ltd. Ayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Hudco Building, 15N, Nellie Square, R.No.14, 7Th Floor, Kolkata – Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700 700 069. 087. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabct 8820 B (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

condone the delay and admit the Cross-objection for hearing. 4. The grievances raised by the Revenue in ITA No.2305/Kol/2017, for A.Y.2011-12, are as follows: “1.Whether on the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in allowing a claim of Rs.3,28,00,000/-, disregarding the fact that there had been

THE JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT CIR.-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Acit, Circle 1(2), Kolkata Vs. The Jute Corporation Of India Ltd. Ayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Hudco Building, 15N, Nellie Square, R.No.14, 7Th Floor, Kolkata – Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700 700 069. 087. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabct 8820 B (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

condone the delay and admit the Cross-objection for hearing. 4. The grievances raised by the Revenue in ITA No.2305/Kol/2017, for A.Y.2011-12, are as follows: “1.Whether on the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in allowing a claim of Rs.3,28,00,000/-, disregarding the fact that there had been

I.T.O WD - 7(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AVRO COMMERCIAL COMPANY LIMITED., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed as stated above

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

delay in filing the appeal by the revenue and cross objection by the assessee are condoned, and the same are admitted and disposed off after perusing the material available on record on merits. 4. The first issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether a sum of Rs.1,09,15,000/- would be brought

JHV CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed but the order of the Pr

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. ITA No.: 1289/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 JHV Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order dated 27.03.2024 under section 263 of the Income

MILK MANTRA DAIRY (P) LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIR.-12(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Milk Mantra Dairy Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Pan: Aagcm1112L Income-Tax Vs. 7Th Floor, Z Tower, Patia Circle-12(1) Nandan Kanan Road, Kolkata. Bhubaneswar-751024. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Rajib Sharma & Shri Jai Somani, Ars Respondent By : Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.07.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Cit(A)-4, Kolkata In Appeal No. 491/Cit(A)-4/16-17 Dated 03.02.2020 Against The Assessment Order Of Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata Passed U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) Dated 13.01.2017. 2. There Is A Delay Of 73 Days In Filing The Present Appeal For Which A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record. From The Condonation Petition, We Note That The Present Appeal Ought To Have Been Filed On Or Before 17.04.2020 Which Falls During The Lockdown Period On Account Of Pandemic Of Covid-19. It Is Requested By The Assessee That Since It Is Prevented By Sufficient & Reasonable Cause, The Delay Of 73 Days In Filing The Appeal May Be Condoned & Appeal Be Admitted For Meritorious Disposal. We Have Heard Both The Sides & Find That Vide Order Dated 10.01.2022, Hon’Ble Supreme Court Has Directed That The Period From 15.03.2020 To 28.02.2022 Is To Be Excluded For The Purpose Of Computing The 2 Milk Mantra Dairy (P) Ltd. A.Y. 2013-14 Limitation Period During The Covid-19 Pandemic. Further, A Period Of 90 Days Is Allowed After 28.02.2022 Vide Same Order. Considering The Facts & The Explanation Of The Assessee, We Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Admit It For Adjudication.

E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT(A)-4, Kolkata in appeal no. 491/CIT(A)-4/16-17 dated 03.02.2020 against the assessment order of DCIT, Circle-12(1), Kolkata passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) dated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7.1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MS. SOYUZ TRADING COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee filed its return of income for AY 2014-15 declaring total loss of Rs. 60,92,952/-. The case of assessee was selected for scrutiny, notice u/s 143(2) was issued thereafter notice u/s 142(1) along with

LATE RAM KISHAN MALL, L/H SHRI MAN MOHAN MALL ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 62(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2004-05

22-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2004-05, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata’s order dated 15.01.2018 passed in case No.1389/ACIT,C-24/CIT(A)-21/KOL/2014-15, involving proceedings u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income

M/S. JEEVANDARSHI MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 509/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 M/S. Jeevandarshi Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Kolkata 4Th Floor Vs 9, India Exchange Place Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaacj8585A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, A/R Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/11/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 23/08/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2019-2020. 2. The Sole Issue Raised By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer Wherein The Assessing Officer Had Disallowed The Carry Forward Of Business Loss Of Rs.72,96,597/- On The Ground That The Return Was Filed On 01/11/2019 Whereas The Due Date Of Filing Was On 31/10/2019. 3. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income On 01/11/2019 Declaring Total Loss At Rs.72,96,596/-. The Same Was Processed By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru U/S 143(1) Of The Act Vide Intimation Dt. 30/04/2020, Wherein The Claim Of The Assessee Of Carry Forward Of Loss To Subsequent Year Was Rejected On The Ground That The Return Was Filed On 01/11/2019. 4. Aggrieved The Assesse Carried The Matter In Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A). The Ld. Cit(A) Simply Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee By

E R PER SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dt. 23/08/2022, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2019-2020. 2. The sole issue raised by the assessee

M/S MEDI DRIPS CARRIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward-12(4), 8Th Floor, R.No.818, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4, Synagogue Street, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm 8139 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Rustogi, Aca Revenue By : Shri Saurav Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.490/Xii/12(4)/10-11, Dated 11.11.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.12.2010. 2. The Said Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By Four Days. The Assessee Filed The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Expressed The Reasons Of Delay. After Verification Of Petition We Found That There Was A Reasonable Cause For Four Days Delay In Filing The Appeal. Even Ld Dr Did Not Object To Condone The Delay. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2008. Subsequently The 2 M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. Assessee Company Filed Its Revised Return Of Income On 9-12-2008

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case qua the assessee are that the assessee company filed its return of income on 30.09.2008. Subsequently the 2 M/s Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. assessee company filed its revised return of income on 9-12-2008 showing total loss at Rs.3

I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. ITA No.2652/Kol/2019 & CO No. 15/Kol/2020 PCM Strescon Overseas Ventures Ltd., AY 2012-13 2. At the outset, the Ld. A.R. for the assessee Shri Akkal Dudhwewala submitted that ITA No. 2652/Kol/2019 is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2012-13 dated 24.07.2019, wherein

M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD.,SILIGURI vs. PCIT-1, , KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. ITA No.2652/Kol/2019 & CO No. 15/Kol/2020 PCM Strescon Overseas Ventures Ltd., AY 2012-13 2. At the outset, the Ld. A.R. for the assessee Shri Akkal Dudhwewala submitted that ITA No. 2652/Kol/2019 is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2012-13 dated 24.07.2019, wherein

JYOTI RANJAN ROY(LIMITED GUAREDIAN -SUVAJIT ROY),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 49(1), 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

22, 2025 I.T.A. No.963/Kol/2024, I.T.A. No.314/Kol/2017&I.T.A. No.261/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Jyoti Ranjan Roy ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXXII, Kolkata, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata &National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred