DIPANSHU GUPTA,HOWWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 37(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeals for adjudication.\n2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following\ngrounds of appeal:\nI.T.A. Nos.: 2448 & 2449/KOL/2024\n Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18\nDipanshu Gupta.\nAY 2015-16\n“1.) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred\nin passing

PEE KAY VANIJYA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 7(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 5. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a resident Indian Company, filed its return of income electronically on 30.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 8,080/-. The case was selected for complete (CASS) scrutiny assessment as per existing norms

DCIT EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA vs. B P PODDAR FOUNDATION FOR EDUCATION, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.637/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year. : 2022-2023) Dcit Exemptions Circle-1(1), Vs B P Poddar Foundation For Education, Kolkata 18, Poddar Court, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aaatb 5418 M (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiayn, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 18/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 23.12.2024, Passed By The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-9, Mumbai For A.Y.2022- 2023. 2. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Delayed By 26 Days For Which The Revenue Has Filed The Necessary Condonation Petition. The Reasons Given Are Plausible & Same Are Accepted. Accordingly, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 4. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld.Ar Has Filed His Written Submission Which Read As Under :- Before The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata "A" Bench. Kolkata.

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 4. At the time of hearing, ld.AR has filed his written submission which read as under :- BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA "A" BENCH. KOLKATA. 2 IN THE MATTER OF BP PODDAR FOUNDATION FOR EDUCATION 18. Poddar Court, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata-700 001. PAN: AAATB5418M AND IN THE MATTER

BIMAL KUMAR SIKARIA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 40, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee`s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Bimal Kumar Sikaria Vs. Acit, Circle-40, Kolkata 159, Ramdular Sarkar Street, Kolkata – 700006. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aurps0380C (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for hearing. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee informs the Bench that assessee does not want to press Ground No.3, therefore we dismiss Ground No.3 raised by the assessee as not pressed. 5. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee relates to addition of Rs.45,00,000/- as undisclosed income

DIGVIJAY FINLEASE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

230/- and tax liability @ 22% including surcharge and education cess of Rs. 5,73,72,220/-. The return of income was processed and determined the tax liability @30% and additional demand of Rs. 78,76,850/- was raised. 3. Aggrieved by the said demand, the rectification request has been done by the assessee which was disposed

ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROF INCOMETAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2),KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA vs. M/S. ANUBANDH FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. First, we shall take up the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 2390/KOL/2024. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of share capital

M/S PREMIER IRRIGATION ADRITEC (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

condoned. Ground No.1 & 2 – Vide Ground Nos.1 & 2, the assessee has 4. agitated the confirmation of addition of Rs.10,10,774/- made by the Assessing Officer invoking the provisions to section 43B of the Act for delay in depositing employees contribution to provident fund and employees state insurance. 5. Heard both the sides. At the outset, we note that

DREAMLAND EDUCATION SOCIETY,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIR-2, HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos. 489-495/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2011-12

delay in filing these appeals are accordingly condoned. 5. The assessee is running a school upto XII standard under ICSE Board. The assesse is a registered society having been registered under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961 bearing registration No.S/32405 of 1981-82. As already stated it is solely engaged in imparting education to pre-primary and primary section

JATIN KHARA,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD-30(1)/ KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

230 days. The Ld. CIT(A) has relied on several authorities and refused to condone the said delay. 2 Jatin Khara 1.2 Further, aggrieved with this action of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal with the following grounds: “1. THAT the CPC Bangalore processed my return u/s. 143(1) and assessed my income

DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MCNALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

Delay condoned. Leave granted. Pending hearing and final disposal of the Civil appeal, Department is restrained from recovering penalty and interest which has accrued till date. It is made clear that as far as 6 ITA Nos.2776/A/2011,1575/K/2011 & 927/K/.2013 Mc Nally Sayaji Engg. Ltd.., AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 the outstanding interest demand as of date is concerned, it would

MC NALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

Delay condoned. Leave granted. Pending hearing and final disposal of the Civil appeal, Department is restrained from recovering penalty and interest which has accrued till date. It is made clear that as far as 6 ITA Nos.2776/A/2011,1575/K/2011 & 927/K/.2013 Mc Nally Sayaji Engg. Ltd.., AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 the outstanding interest demand as of date is concerned, it would

DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S RAV DRAVYA PVT LTD , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenues is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 103/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Rav Dravya Private Limited Tax, Circle-4(1), Kolkata Hastings Chambers, 2Nd Floor Vs 7/C, Kiran Shankar Roy Road Kolkata - 700001 Pan : Aabcr3154Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Revenue By : Md. Ghayasuddin, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 13/03/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. This Revenue’S Appeal Is Time Barred By 198 Days & The Petition Seeking Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed Stating That The Delay In Filing Of This Appeal Was Attributable To The Restrictions Imposed Due To Covid-19 Pandemic. We Have Heard Both The Sides & Find That There Is Reasonable Cause For Delay In Filing Of The Appeal On Time. Hence We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing.

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The revenue has raised the following revised grounds of appeal before this Tribunal:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in admitting new documentary evidence during the appeal proceedings in violation of Rule

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

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. JUPITER INTERNATIONAL LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata ………….……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Jupiter International Limited..……………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Unnayanam, 20A, Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue, Kol-19.. [Pan: Aaacj6956B] Appearances By: Shri P. N Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Nandini Sureka, Advocate, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.10.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘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 197 Days & The Revenue Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. After Going Over The Said Petition, We Find Sufficient Reasons Behind The Delay & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company was established on 08.09.1978 and is engaged in the trading of computer peripherals and parts and manufacturing of CDR and DVDR. The Jupiter International Limited assessee company filed its original return

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

condone the delay for adjudication and dismiss these two appeals as not pressed. Accordingly, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. 4. 5. Now, we take up the two appeals by the Revenue in ITA Nos. 917 & 918/Kol/2017 for AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11. Both the parties agree that in both the appeals grounds raised are common

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

condone the delay for adjudication and dismiss these two appeals as not pressed. Accordingly, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. 4. 5. Now, we take up the two appeals by the Revenue in ITA Nos. 917 & 918/Kol/2017 for AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11. Both the parties agree that in both the appeals grounds raised are common

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

condone the delay for adjudication and dismiss these two appeals as not pressed. Accordingly, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. 4. 5. Now, we take up the two appeals by the Revenue in ITA Nos. 917 & 918/Kol/2017 for AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11. Both the parties agree that in both the appeals grounds raised are common

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

condone the delay for adjudication and dismiss these two appeals as not pressed. Accordingly, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. 4. 5. Now, we take up the two appeals by the Revenue in ITA Nos. 917 & 918/Kol/2017 for AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11. Both the parties agree that in both the appeals grounds raised are common