ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

condone the delay. However, considerable time has passed since the new system of National Faceless Appeal Centre has been adopted by the Revenue authorities, therefore, proper procedure should be made and system to be streamlined so that there is no delay in filing the appeal on account of the said reason. 3. Since all these appeals pertain to the same

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKA, KOLKATA vs. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

condone the delay. However, considerable time has passed since the new system of National Faceless Appeal Centre has been adopted by the Revenue authorities, therefore, proper procedure should be made and system to be streamlined so that there is no delay in filing the appeal on account of the said reason. 3. Since all these appeals pertain to the same

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

condone the delay. However, considerable time has passed since the new system of National Faceless Appeal Centre has been adopted by the Revenue authorities, therefore, proper procedure should be made and system to be streamlined so that there is no delay in filing the appeal on account of the said reason. 3. Since all these appeals pertain to the same

BASTUHARA SAHAYATA SAMITI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(2)(EXEMPTION),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 444/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti,……………….…Appellant 27/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Srimini Market, Kolkata-700006, West Bengal [Pan:Aaatb7422R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-1(2), (Exemption), Kolkata, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

delay in filing electronically Form No. 10 should be condoned u/s. 119(2)(b) of the Act. 13. Similarly, on the facts of the case as stated above, benefit of accumulation of corpus fund as contemplated in clause (a) of sec.11(2) of the Act (refer Ground No.6 of this appeal) is also available to the appellant-society

DCIT, CIR-5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PROFICIENT COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee in CO No

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1346/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

condone the delay and admit the cross objection of the assessee for hearing. M/s Proficient Commodities Pvt. Ltd. M/s Proficient Commodities Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.1346/Kol/2016&C. O. No. 2016&C. O. No. 36/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: Assessment Year:2012-13 6. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for . At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 1246/KOL/2019; AY 2012-13: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the sum of Rs.77,70,880/- incurred towards

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 1246/KOL/2019; AY 2012-13: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the sum of Rs.77,70,880/- incurred towards

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6,, KOLKATA vs. LOKNATH SARAF SECURITIES LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, to sum up ITA No

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

201. The question whether or not the provisions of explanation to section 73 could be invoked, without meeting the tests laid down in Aman Portfolio's case (Supra), could be purely academic. Section 70 and section 71 of the Act meaning and interpretations are as under:- Section 70: set off of loss from one source against income from another source

D.C.I.T CIR - 55,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL HOMOEO LABORATORIES, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, A.M. & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M.)

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling Homoeopathic medicines and earns its major income from the said activities. During the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 10.10.2008 showing therein total income

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,EAST SIKKIM vs. D.C.I.T.(TDS), CIRCLE - 5 , GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,EAST SIKKIM vs. D.C.I.T.(TDS), CIRCLE - 5, GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,EAST SIKKIM vs. D.C.I.T. (TDS), GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,RANGPO, EAST SIKKIM vs. DCIT (TDS), CIRCLE - 5, GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,EAST SIKKIM vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5, GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,EAST SIKKIM vs. D.C.I.T.(TDS), CIRCLE - 5, GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,EAST SIKKIM vs. D.C.I.T. (TDS), CIRCLE - 5, GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,EAST SIKKAM vs. D.C.I.T. (TDS), CIRCLE - 5, GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with

SIKKIM DISTILLERIES LIMITED,EAST SIKKIM vs. D.C.I.T. (TDS), CIRCLE - 5, GANGTOK, GANGTOK

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 201(1A) of the Act. The Registry has informed that there are delays in filing of the instant appeals and the periods of delay range from 72 days to 131 days in all of the 12 appeals. The appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and the same is reproduced as under: “In connection with