COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

226 days. After hearing the rival contentions of both the sides on the admission of appeals for adjudication ,we observe that the delay is caused due to the illness of the Chief Executive Officer of the company who was looking after the tax matters of the assesse company. After perusal of the affidavit filed by Chief Executive Officer Shri Pavitra

COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

226 days. After hearing the rival contentions of both the sides on the admission of appeals for adjudication ,we observe that the delay is caused due to the illness of the Chief Executive Officer of the company who was looking after the tax matters of the assesse company. After perusal of the affidavit filed by Chief Executive Officer Shri Pavitra

COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

226 days. After hearing the rival contentions of both the sides on the admission of appeals for adjudication ,we observe that the delay is caused due to the illness of the Chief Executive Officer of the company who was looking after the tax matters of the assesse company. After perusal of the affidavit filed by Chief Executive Officer Shri Pavitra

UNION BANK OF INDIA,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(2), BURDWAN

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

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

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Brief facts (for AY 2014-15) of the case are that the AO notes that the assessee is a Government Bank engaged in banking activities and it takes deposits from customer and against such deposit, the customers earn interest on their deposit. The AO notes that a survey operation

UNION BANK OF INDIA,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(2), BURDWAN

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

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

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. Brief facts (for AY 2014-15) of the case are that the AO notes that the assessee is a Government Bank engaged in banking activities and it takes deposits from customer and against such deposit, the customers earn interest on their deposit. The AO notes that a survey operation

SMT PRATIMA SARKAR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-2, COOCHBEHAR, COOCHBIHAR

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

226 days on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of the said delay and keeping in view the reasons given therein, which are fully supported by a documentary evidence in the form of medical certificate, I am of the view that the delay

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BANDHAN FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata..……………… ……………...……….……….……Appellant Vs. Bandhan Financial Services Ltd....………………………….......……...…..…..Respondent Dn 32 Salt Lake, Salt Lake City, Sech Bhawan, S.O Salt Lake, Kol-700091. [Pan: Aabcg0611R] Appearances By: Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Biswanath Paul, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 11, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.06.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 56 Days. The Revenue Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Petition For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2014–15. 2. The appeal has been filed by the revenue with a delay of 56 days. The revenue has filed a petition for condonation of the delay. After considering the reasons cited in the petition for condonation of delay, we find

GARRAH SKUS LIMITED,BANKURA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1),, BANKURA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

226(3) dated 15.10.2025 by hand, the assessee came to know that the appeal could not be filed as the appeal papers were kept in some other file by mistake. It was submitted that the delay had arisen because of the inaction on the part of the counsel of the ITA No.: 2361/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Garrah SKUS Limited

M/S G. PAUL & SONS,KOLKATA vs. PR. CIT-15, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2011-12 M/S G. Paul & Sons V/S. Principal Commissioner Of 167, Netaji Subash Road, Income Tax-15, 3, Rajakatra, Government Place, Kolkata-700 007 Kolkata-700 001 [Pan No.Ssvgh 4738 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Vigyaneshwar Nath Datta, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-11-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15 -11-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Arises Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-15 Kolkata’S Order Dated 10.02.2016 Passed In M.No. Pcit-15/Kol/U/S263/15-16/6882-84 Involving Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

condone the impugned delay of 375 days delay in filing. 3. We now advert to merits of the main appeal. The assessee admittedly is a partnership firm engaged in re-selling tea business. It is submitted its return on 28.09.2011 disclosing total income of ₹3,78,365/- which stood processed on 23.03.2013 accepting the returned income. The Assessing Officer thereafter

DCIT, C.C.-3(4), KOLKATA vs. M/S TANISHQUE TRADE LINK PVT. LTD, HOWRAH

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 17/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tanishque Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata Vs Bhabatarini Apartment G.T. Road, Room No. 602 Howrah - 711201 [Pan : Aacct7512R] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/01/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 24/09/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Allowing The Bogus Share Capital Raised In The Books Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Failed To Discharge Its Primary Onus To Prove & Establish The Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Investor Companies & Genuineness Of The Transaction. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Ignoring That The Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Shareholders & Even The Genuineness Of The Transactions Remained Unexplained. 3. That On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Invoking His Powers U/S. 250(4) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 In Directing The Assessing Officer To Make Further Enquiry & Report The Results Of The

226 (Karnataka) Assessment year 1996-97 - Whether where assessee-company received certain amount from shareholders and, in support of said transactions assessee gave addresses of shareholders and their identity was not in dispute, in such a situation it was not for assessee-company to establish but it was for department to enquire with investors about their capacity to invest amount

ITO, WARD - 6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CFL CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., KOLKATA

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

Delay condoned. 3. The assessee is a Non-banking Finance Company engaged in the business of leasing. It filed its return of income on 01.11.2004 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,28,99,760/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) on 22.12.2006 determining the total income at Rs. 4,35,48,572/-, inter alia, making

CFL CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Delay condoned. 3. The assessee is a Non-banking Finance Company engaged in the business of leasing. It filed its return of income on 01.11.2004 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,28,99,760/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) on 22.12.2006 determining the total income at Rs. 4,35,48,572/-, inter alia, making

DCIT, CIR-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOODRICKE GROUP LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 971/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2007-08 Dcit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Goodricke Group Ltd., Kolkata [Pan: Aabcg1614Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 31.12.2009 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 10 days in filing the appeal before us by the revenue, for which an affidavit had been filed by the revenue duly explaining the reasons

RAHEE STEEL TECH PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Assessing Officer On 10.1.2024, Therefore, The Action Of Ao (Cpc) Is Not Correct & Cannot Be Sustained & So Also The Order Of The Ld Cit(A). The Above View Finds Support From The Decision Of Hon’Ble Gujarat High Court In The Case Of Royal Led Equipment (P) Ltd Vs Ccit (2025) 174 Taxmann.Com 61 (Gujarat), Wherein, The Hon’Ble High Court Has Held As Under:

condoning the delay in filing such Form by moulding the prayer made by the petitioner to treat the Form 10IC filed by the petitioner for Assessment Year 2021-2022 to be treated as that of for Assessment Year 2021. The provisions of Section 119(2)(b) of the Act are meant for redressal of the grievance and hardships caused

A.C.I.T(TDS) CIR - 57,KOL, KOLKATA vs. M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA (P) LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

delay in these cases deserves to be condoned and proceeded to hear the appeals. 3. All the appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by way of consolidated order. 4. The Assessee is a Third Party Administrator (TPA). An insurance company appoints TPA to settle claims and pay to policy holders. The TPA acts as an agent performing

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

delay in these cases deserves to be condoned and proceeded to hear the appeals. 3. All the appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by way of consolidated order. 4. The Assessee is a Third Party Administrator (TPA). An insurance company appoints TPA to settle claims and pay to policy holders. The TPA acts as an agent performing

HERIGAGE HEALTH TPA(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT(TDS), CIRCLE -57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

delay in these cases deserves to be condoned and proceeded to hear the appeals. 3. All the appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by way of consolidated order. 4. The Assessee is a Third Party Administrator (TPA). An insurance company appoints TPA to settle claims and pay to policy holders. The TPA acts as an agent performing

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

delay in these cases deserves to be condoned and proceeded to hear the appeals. 3. All the appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by way of consolidated order. 4. The Assessee is a Third Party Administrator (TPA). An insurance company appoints TPA to settle claims and pay to policy holders. The TPA acts as an agent performing