PUROTECH MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD -9(3), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

delay in filing of the appeal which is as follows: 8. In this context, we have perused the several decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and find that in Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575], this Court reiterated the following classic statement from Krishna vs. Chathappan [1890 ILR 13 Mad 269]: "... Section 5 gives

PUROTECH MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-9(3), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

delay in filing of the appeal which is as follows: 8. In this context, we have perused the several decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and find that in Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575], this Court reiterated the following classic statement from Krishna vs. Chathappan [1890 ILR 13 Mad 269]: "... Section 5 gives

SANKAR GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-50(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

condone the delay in filing the appeal and oblige.” 7. In this context we have gone through the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court which is as under: “5. In this context, we have perused the several decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and find that in Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575], this

SANKAR GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-50(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

condone the delay in filing the appeal and oblige.” 7. In this context we have gone through the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court which is as under: “5. In this context, we have perused the several decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and find that in Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575], this

TAKDAH LINGDING GPSKUS LTD.,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), DARJEELING

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

condonation petition of the assessee reveals sufficient cause for delay. 5. In this context, we have perused the several decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and find that in Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575], this Court reiterated the following classic statement from Krishna vs. Chathappan [1890 ILR 13 Mad 269]: "... Section

HIMADRI VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, (OSD), WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

condoning the delay in filing the appeal by observing that there is lack of diligence and inaction on its part which could have been avoided by the appellant with due care and attention, there being valid and cogent reasons. The issues on legal grounds as also on merits was not decided by him. 29. After the delay having been explained

AVIJIT MONDAL ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-52(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

delay of 20 days had been caused. 5.3. In this context, we have perused the several decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and find that in Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575], this Court reiterated the following classic statement from Krishna vs. Chathappan [1890 ILR 13 Mad 269]: "... Section 5 gives the courts a discretion

DEVNADI ADVISORY PRIVATE LIMITED,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 13(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as it has been filed after a delay of 172 days and there was no sufficient cause has been shown.

delay of 172 days in filing the appeal is not condoned as no sufficient cause has been shown. The Ld. A.R submits that in fact the person who is looking after the income tax matters went on leave for a long time to his native place and suddenly, he fell ill at his residence and due to that reason

KAUSHALYA SINGHA,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), SILIGURI

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

condoning the delay. 3. On the contrary, ld. D/R supports the impugned order. 4. We have perused the order of the ld. CIT(A) and find that ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that delay has not sufficiently been explained by the assessee. It admits of no doubt that there was no decision on merit rather appeal

K.B. PROCESSING,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(6), KOLKATA

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

delay in submission\nof appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the order of the A.O. may kindly\nbe condoned for which I shall be highly obliged.\nThe above statements are true to the best of my knowledge & belief.\nDeclared this the 8th day of January, 2025.\nTanmay ghosh\nIdentified by me\nTINA DAS\nLd. Advocate\nsolemniy Atticmea & Leciared before

BILATIBARI TEA COMPANY PVT. LTD.,ISLAMPUR, NORTH DINAJPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), JALPAIGURI , JALPAIGURI

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

Bench: Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

condonation petition of the assessee reveals sufficient cause for delay. 2.1. In this context, we have perused the several decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and find that in Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 Page 2 of 5 I.T.A. No.: 1078/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Bilatibari Tea Company Pvt. Ltd. SC 575], this Court reiterated

UTHAAN FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T., CPC,, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.948 & 949/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) Uthaan Foundation, Vs Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru C/O M/S Salarpuria Jajodia & Co 7, C.R.Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700072 Pan No. :Aaatu 6596 R (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri S. Jhajharai, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm : The Assessee Has Filed Both The Appeals Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 14.02.2025, Passed By The Ld.Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Mumbai For The Assessment Years 2018-2019 & 2020-2021. 2. The Ld.Ar Has Only Prayed That The Matter Be Remitted Back To The File Of Ld.Cit(A) As The Ld. Cit(A) Has Passed The Order Not On Merit Rather He Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee On The Point Of Limitation By Not Condoning The Delay. Ld.Ar By Filing An Affidavit Has Explained The Reason For Delay & Submitted That The Reason Explained By The Assessee Is Plausible & Satisfactory & In The Interest Of Justice The Delay Should Be Condoned & Appeal Be Remitted Back To The File Of Cit(A) For Fresh Order On Merit. 3. Contrary To That, Ld.Sr. Dr Supported The Impugned Order Thereby Submitting That There Is A Long Delay As In One Case The Delay Was Of 1743 Explanation. 4. Upon Hearing The Submission Of The Counsel For The Respective Parties, We Have Perused The Orders Of The Lower Authorities In Both The Cases & Find That The Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Dismissed As The Ld.Cit(A) Did Not Find The Reason For Delay Being Plausible & Satisfactory. Ld.Ar Has Filed An Affidavit Before Us Which Is Essential To Be Produced Hereinbelow :-

condoned and appeal be remitted back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh order on merit. 3. Contrary to that, ld.Sr. DR supported the impugned order thereby submitting that there is a long delay as in one case the delay was of 1743 explanation. 4. Upon hearing the submission of the counsel for the respective parties, we have perused

UTHAAN FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T., CPC,, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.948 & 949/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) Uthaan Foundation, Vs Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru C/O M/S Salarpuria Jajodia & Co 7, C.R.Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700072 Pan No. :Aaatu 6596 R (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri S. Jhajharai, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm : The Assessee Has Filed Both The Appeals Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 14.02.2025, Passed By The Ld.Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Mumbai For The Assessment Years 2018-2019 & 2020-2021. 2. The Ld.Ar Has Only Prayed That The Matter Be Remitted Back To The File Of Ld.Cit(A) As The Ld. Cit(A) Has Passed The Order Not On Merit Rather He Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee On The Point Of Limitation By Not Condoning The Delay. Ld.Ar By Filing An Affidavit Has Explained The Reason For Delay & Submitted That The Reason Explained By The Assessee Is Plausible & Satisfactory & In The Interest Of Justice The Delay Should Be Condoned & Appeal Be Remitted Back To The File Of Cit(A) For Fresh Order On Merit. 3. Contrary To That, Ld.Sr. Dr Supported The Impugned Order Thereby Submitting That There Is A Long Delay As In One Case The Delay Was Of 1743 Explanation. 4. Upon Hearing The Submission Of The Counsel For The Respective Parties, We Have Perused The Orders Of The Lower Authorities In Both The Cases & Find That The Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Dismissed As The Ld.Cit(A) Did Not Find The Reason For Delay Being Plausible & Satisfactory. Ld.Ar Has Filed An Affidavit Before Us Which Is Essential To Be Produced Hereinbelow :-

condoned and appeal be remitted back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh order on merit. 3. Contrary to that, ld.Sr. DR supported the impugned order thereby submitting that there is a long delay as in one case the delay was of 1743 explanation. 4. Upon hearing the submission of the counsel for the respective parties, we have perused

S D RAI PRAYAS EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT WARD 50(1) , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2020-21 S D Rai Prayas Educational Trust……………..……….….……….……Appellant Flat No.Ge Building No.11, Brijdham Housing Complex, Canal Street, Vip Road, Shree Bhumi, North 24 Parganas, Kol-700048.. [Pan: Aavts2993M] Vs. Assessment Unit Ward-50(1), Kolkata …………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent

delay was beyond the control of the assessee. 7. In this context, we have perused several decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and find that in Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575], this Court reiterated the following classic statement from Krishna vs. Chathappan [1890 ILR 13 Mad 269]: "... Section 5 gives the courts a discretion

VASUPUJYA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble, Kz & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Hon’Ble) Assessment Years: 2012-13 Vasupujya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd……...…...........................................................……………….…......Appellant 35, C.R. Avenue Kolkata – 700 012 [Pan : Aaacv 8958 M] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2) Kolkata……….....................……........Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, F.C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Imokaba Jamir, Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 10Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 10Th, 2020 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vp, Kz:-

269/-. In the said return, dividend income of Rs.40,49,933/- received during the year under consideration was claimed to be exempt by the assessee company. No disallowance on account of expenses incurred in relation to the said exempt income, however, was offered to tax by the assessee as required under the provisions of Section 14A of the Income

TIRUPATI NAG,KOLKATA vs. ITO, BURDWAN

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

condoning the delay though the assessee has submitted sufficient reasons that the assessee being an individual salaried employee rendering services at the whim of the management of company travelling from pillar to post depending upon local representative hence the delay had been caused in filing the appeal. The Ld. Counsel further submits that the assessment order has also been passed

TIRUPATI NAG,KOLKATA vs. ITO, BURDAWAN

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

condoning the delay though the assessee has submitted sufficient reasons that the assessee being an individual salaried employee rendering services at the whim of the management of company travelling from pillar to post depending upon local representative hence the delay had been caused in filing the appeal. The Ld. Counsel further submits that the assessment order has also been passed

NARAYAN SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

delay of 28 days in filing the\npresent appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for\nhearing.\n4. It was submitted by the Id. AR that as per the AO, the assessee had\nmade investments in allegedly three penny stock companies, namely, JMD\nTelefilms Industries Limited, Unisys Softwares & Holding Industries Ltd.\nand Nouveau Global Ventures Limited