BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

condone the delay and admit the assessee’s appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. For that education cess included in the liability for income tax is an allowable deduction under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

condone the delay and admit the assessee’s appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. For that education cess included in the liability for income tax is an allowable deduction under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. GOLDEN GOENKA CREDIT PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. Golden Goenka Credit Pvt. Ltd 3. Brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Act was conducted in respect of ‘Golden Goenka group of 18.11.2021 assessees’ on by the directorate of Income

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJ GOENKA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2022-23 Dcit, Cc-4(3), Kolkata……...……..……….………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Raj Goenka…………………………………………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent 10Th Floor Magma House, 24, Park Street Park Street, Kol-16. [Pan: Adlpg8181C] Appearances By: Shri S B Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 04, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 05, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.04.2025 Of The Cit(Appeals)-27, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2022–23. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 08 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.

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 a search and seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Act was conducted in respect of ‘Golden Goenka group of Raj Goenka assessees’ on 18.12.2021 by the directorate of Income Tax (Investigation), UP & Uttarakhand

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

condone the delay in filing of cross objections by the assessee for both the years under appeal and admit the same for adjudication. CO No. 153/Kol/2010 – Asst Year 2006-07 – Assessee CO CO No. 154/Kol/2010 – Asst Year 2007-08 – Assessee CO & CO Nos. 153 & 154/Kol/2010 Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., AY 2006-07 & 2007-08 3. The only issue

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

condone the delay in filing of cross objections by the assessee for both the years under appeal and admit the same for adjudication. CO No. 153/Kol/2010 – Asst Year 2006-07 – Assessee CO CO No. 154/Kol/2010 – Asst Year 2007-08 – Assessee CO & CO Nos. 153 & 154/Kol/2010 Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., AY 2006-07 & 2007-08 3. The only issue

ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S VISHNU DISTRIBUTORS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of any merit, hence dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 50/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-2013

260A of the Income Tax Act, (the Act) and they are required to examine as to whether any substantial questions of law arise for consideration, we exercise our discretion in the matter and condone the delay in filing the appeal. ITAT/187/2023 This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order dated 27th March, 2019 passed by the Income

PRAFULLA KUMAR MALAKAR, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KANYA KUMARI PROPERTIES PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

delay is hereby condoned and the case is taken up for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of construction, filed its return of income for AY 2012-13 declaring total income of Rs. 51,40,573/-. The case was accordingly processed u/s 143(1) accepting

M/S. LOKNATH SARAF SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed as not maintainable and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

condone the delay and admit the appeal of revenue for hearing. 2 ITA No.300-418/Kol/2011, AY 2006-07 Lokenath Saraf Securities Ltd. 3. We find from the quantum involved in the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is having tax effect of less than Rs 10 lacs. The CBDT in its recent Circular No. 21 / 2015 dated 10.12.2015 had categorically

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed as not maintainable and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

condone the delay and admit the appeal of revenue for hearing. 2 ITA No.300-418/Kol/2011, AY 2006-07 Lokenath Saraf Securities Ltd. 3. We find from the quantum involved in the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is having tax effect of less than Rs 10 lacs. The CBDT in its recent Circular No. 21 / 2015 dated 10.12.2015 had categorically

SAIKAT CHATTERJEE,KOLKATA vs. ITO 61(1), KOLKATA

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

delay,\nassessee points out that were pursuing a remedy\nbefore another appellate forum which ought to be\nexcluded, said averment is sufficient to invoke section\n14 of the Limitation Act or principles laid down\ntherein. Provisions of the Limitation Act dealing with\nsuits, applications and appeals apply only to Courts\nand not to Tribunal other quasi-judicial authorities\nbut principles

M/S. FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condone the delay on the part of the assessee in filing its appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to dispose of the same on merit. 3. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are as follows:- The assessee is a partnership firm, which carried on the business of buying, selling, trading or otherwise dealing

M/S SHREENATH HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O.,WARD-5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble] I.T.A. No. 2390/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Shreenath Holding Pvt. Ltd…………...……………....……..…………..………………....……Appellant 33/34, Ramlal Mukherjee Lane 2Nd Floor Room No. 2D Howrah - 711106 [Pan: Aadcs 5887 P] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), Kolkata…………………………..............….....….…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 24Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 26Th, 2020 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld.Cit(A)”), Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’), Dt. 17/10/2019, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Is A Company & Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading & Distribution Of Goods. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 16/08/2012 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.15,500/-. During The Year, The Assessee Raised Share Capital Including Premium Amounting To Rs.1,13,55,000/-. The Assessing Officer Conducted Enquiries & The Assessee Presented The Share Holders Including The Directors Of The Share Holding Companies Before The Assessing Officer. After Due Enquiry, The Assessing Officer Accepted The Explanations Of The Assessee That The Cash Credits In The Form Of Share Capital Were Genuine, Except In The Case Of M/S. Seacom Merchants, Which Had Applied For Shares. An Amount Of Rs. 20,00,000/- Pertaining To M/S. Seacom Merchants, Was Added.

Delay condoned. Leave granted. Heard learned counsel on both sides. Heard learned counsel on both sides. We have examined the position. We find that the shareholders are genuine parties. We have examined the position. We find that the shareholders are genuine parties. We have examined the position. We find that the shareholders are genuine parties. They are not bogus

ITO, WD-5(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SAYAJI MARKETING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result we set aside the order of the Ld

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 282/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Ito, Ward-5(2), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Sayaji Marketing Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aagcs 0147 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 39/Kol/2018 (Arising Out Of I.T.A No. 282/Kol/2014) Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S Sayaji Marketing Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-5(2), Kolkata [Pan: Aagcs 0147 M] (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

condone the delay in filing the cross objection by the assessee in the instant case. Hence cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as maintainable. 7. On merits of the addition contested by the revenue before us in respect of deletion of addition made towards share capital in the sum of Rs. 190,00,00,000/-, we find that

M/S. TEDIUM COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered in favour of the revenue

Bench: the AO. Finally the AO added the amount as unexplained cash credit to the income of the assessee.

260A of the Income Tax Act, (the Act) and they are required to examine as to whether any substantial questions of law arise for consideration, we exercise our discretion in the matter and condone the delay in filing the appeal. ITAT/187/2023 This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order dated 27th March, 2019 passed by the Income

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

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