DILIP KUMAR PRAMANIK,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals 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. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 1579/KOL/2025: “I. FOR THAT the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department (hereinafter referred to as the "Appellate Authority") erred in dismissing the appeal which has been filed by the appellant

ALLAHABAD BANK, NAKTALA BRANCH,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, TDS RG.57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1384/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Allahabad Bank, Vs. Jcit(Tds), Range-57, 10B, Middleton Row, 8Th Floor, Naktala Branch, 364/23A, Nsc Bose Road, Kolkata-700071 Kolkata-700040 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Cala 06329 B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Tapas Dutta, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Md. Ghayas Uddin, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 23/02/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 22/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-2011, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xvi, Kolkata, In Appeal No.138/Cit(A)-Xvi/Jcit,R-57/13-14/Kol, Dated 28.02.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Jt.Commissoner Of Income Tax-Tds (Ao),U/S.272A(2)(K)/274 Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 08.12.2011. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Quarterly Tds Returns Late Therefore The Assessing Officer (Tds) Imposed Penalty On The Assessee U/S 272A(2)(K) Of The Act At Rs.50,336/- 3. The Captioned Appeal Is Time Barred By 32 Days. The Assessee Filed Petition For Condonation Of Delay In Filing The Said Appeal. The Assessee Explained The Reasons For Delay Stating That Assessee Is A Schedule Bank

condoned. V. For that the Jt. Commissioner should have appreciated that there is no delay in depositing tax deducted at sources and even if in any delay interest is paid for delayed payment of such tax. VI. For that the Jt. Commissioner should have appreciated that in the Finance Act, 2005 has inserted a new clause (k) in sub section

DIPANSHU GUPTA,HOWRAH 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

DEEPAK SWITCH GEARS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd….…......................…...……………....Appellant 48/6, Suman Villa, 2Nd Floor, 155, Jessore Road, Kolkata-700055. [Pan: Aabcd1131H] Vs. Pcit, Asansol….....….........................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 158 Days. A Separate Application Of Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Wherein, It Has Been Pleaded That After Receipt Of The Impugned Order Of The Pr. Cit, The Assessee, Through Its Director, Shri Deep Kishan Saraf, Immediately Approached One Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Chartered

delay in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to decide the appeal on merits. I.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd 6. The brief facts of the case are that as noted from the order of the ld. Pr. CIT are that the assessee filed return of income for the year under

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(4) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PKC COMMODITIES (P) LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2632/Kol/2018 (िनधा"रणवष"S / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit, Cc-3(4), Kolkata Vs. M/S Pkc Commodities (P) Ltd. 1, R.N. Mukherjee Rd, Martin Burn House, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata- 700001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aabcr 5112 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for hearing. 3. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are as follows: 1. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT (A) ignored the facts that the assessee failed to produce any evidence to prove that entity of M/s. JKT Trading

BINOD MOKTAN,KALIMPONG vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), KALIMPONG

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.353/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Binod Moktan……...……………………..…………………....Appellant Upper Pedong, P.O Pedong, Kalimpong District, W.B. 734311. [Pan: Aripm6300Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(4), Kalimpong……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Bonnie Debbarma, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 21, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 22, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.12.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Received Contractual Receipts Of Rs.51,04,000 From M/S. Gajmer Works During The A.Y. 2018-19 & Tax Deducted At Source (Tds) Amounting To Rs.54,040/- Was Also Made On The Said Receipts. However, The Assessee Did Not File Its Return Of Income For The Said Assessment Year. Subsequently, Proceedings Were Initiated Under Section 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 & A Notice Under Section 148 Was Issued. In Response, The Assessee Filed A Return Declaring Total Income Of Rs.4,92,770/-. However, The Assessing Officer Completed The

272/-. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay of 130 days in filing the appeal, holding that no sufficient cause was made out for condonation of the delay 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee is in appeal before

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

CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1220/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Cathay Pacific Airways Limited,…………….…Appellant Room No. 14, 3Rd Floor, New Integrated Cargo Terminal, Nscbi Airport, Kolkata-700052 [Pan:Aabcc5644E] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…….Respondent (International Taxation), Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Em Bye-Pass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Sm. Archana Gupta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: October 14, 2025 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. The facts in brief are that the appellant is a non-resident company. The appellant is engaged in the business of operation of aircraft in international traffic. For the year under consideration, the appellant filed the return of income within the prescribed due date declaring total Income of Rs. 1,60,62,140/- and a refund

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

RITUDHARA DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward-4(1), Kolkata Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Ritudhara Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 5/1, Clive Row, 4 Th Floor, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcr7607A Assessee By : Shri Somitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication, 05. The only issue raised in the various grounds of appeal is against the confirmation of ₹12,93,00,000/- by the ld. CIT (A) in an ex-parte order as made by the ld. AO on account of share capital/ share premium despite the assessee filing all the relevant documents

M/S. PEARL TRACOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds: “1. For that in view of the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld. PCIT was wholly unjustified in setting aside the order passed by the AO u/s 263/143(3) dt. 30.12.2016 holding the said order

BHAGAWAN RAM SHARMA,SIKKIM vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1),, GANGTOK, SIKKIM

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) also it is recorded in para 4.1 at page 2 of the impugned order that the assessee did not make any fruitful compliance before him and thereafter, the addition made was confirmed by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal.

272(A(1)(d) of the Act. The Ld. AO seen to have levy of penalty for non- attendance. This penalty was confirmed on account of the fact that there was no compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) fixing the dates for hearing. 2. Aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed

BHAGAWAN RAM SHARMA,SIKKIM vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1),, GANGTOK

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) also it is recorded in para 4.1 at page 2 of the impugned order that the assessee did not make any fruitful compliance before him and thereafter, the addition made was confirmed by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal.

272(A(1)(d) of the Act. The Ld. AO seen to have levy of penalty for non- attendance. This penalty was confirmed on account of the fact that there was no compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) fixing the dates for hearing. 2. Aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed

BHAGAWAN RAM SHARMA,SIKKIM vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1),, GANGTOK

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) also it is recorded in para 4.1 at page 2 of the impugned order that the assessee did not make any fruitful compliance before him and thereafter, the addition made was confirmed by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal.

272(A(1)(d) of the Act. The Ld. AO seen to have levy of penalty for non- attendance. This penalty was confirmed on account of the fact that there was no compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) fixing the dates for hearing. 2. Aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.\n1.3 Since the issues are common, all the eight appeals were heard\ntogether and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of\nconvenience and brevity.\n2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No.\n466/KOL/2018:\n“1) That on the facts and circumstances

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 1.3 Since the issues are common, all the eight appeals were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 466/KOL/2018: “1) That on the facts and circumstances

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.\n1.3 Since the issues are common, all the eight appeals were heard\ntogether and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of\nconvenience and brevity.\n2.\nThe assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No.\n466/KOL/2018:\n“1) That on the facts and circumstances

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.\n1.3 Since the issues are common, all the eight appeals were heard\ntogether and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of\nconvenience and brevity.\n2.\nThe assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No.\n466/KOL/2018:\n“1) That on the facts and circumstances