SRI BHAGDEV ROY,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T CC - XII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of revenue are partly allowed for AYs 2009-10 and 2010-

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. In all appeals, the assessee has raised the 1st, 2nd and 3rd grounds against the 3. legal validity of proceedings initiated u/s. 153C of the Act which has not been pressed before us, therefore, we dismiss the same as not pressed. 4. The ground no. 4 of assessee’s appeal

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MURSHIDABAD vs. ASOK KUMAR JAIN, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Income Tax Officer Asok Kumar Jain Aaykar Bhawan, 39, Rn Tagore 23, Shahid Surya Sen Road, Road, Berhampore, Murshidabad, Berhampore, Murshidabad, Vs. West Bengal-742101 West Bengal-742101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aevpj2710Yh Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.09.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 2. The only issue raised by the assessee is against the double addition by the ld. AO / CPC. Asok Kumar Jain; A.Y. 2021-22 2.1. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 04-03-2022 and intimation under section 143(1) of the Income

MANAVTA TRADE LINK PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 10(2),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Sonjoy Sarmamanavta Trade-Link Pvt Ltd Vs Ito, Ward-10 (2), Kolkata Room No.4, 24 Roy Steet, L.R.Sarani, Kolkata West Bengal-700020 Pan No.Aaicm 3500 C (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manjunatha G, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 29.06.2024 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-2018, On The Following Grounds :- 1. That The Order Passed U/S 250 Is Bad In Law As Well As On Facts Of The Case. That The Hon'Ble Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld. Assessing Officer In Rejecting The Books Of Accounts Under Section 145 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Establishing Any Cogent Or Specific Defect In The Regularly Maintained & Audited Books Of Accounts Of The Appellant 2. That The Hon'Ble Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Further Erred In Confirming The Assessment Framed Under Section 144 Of The Act By Estimating Net Profit @1.5% On Total Rs.64,50,64,196/- & Thereby Sustaining An Arbitrary Addition Of Rs. 96,75,963/-, Ignoring The Actual Audited Turnover & Net Profit Disclosed By The Appellant In Its Return 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Admitting That Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard Was Not Granted By The Assessing Officer Before Proceeding To Reject The Books & Complete The 2

section 144 of the Act by estimating net profit @1.5% on total Rs.64,50,64,196/-, and thereby sustaining an arbitrary addition of Rs. 96,75,963/-, ignoring the actual audited turnover and net profit disclosed by the appellant in its return 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not admitting that proper opportunity of being heard

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

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 - 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 of 8 days is condoned and appeal of the revenue is hereby admitted for adjudication. 3. DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE ACT Grounds covered Ground No. 1 (a) & (b) in ITA No. 2776/Kol/2011 for Asst Year 2008-09 Ground Nos. 3 (a) &(b) in ITA No. 927/Kol/2013 for Asst Year 2009-10 The facts in Asst Year

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 of 8 days is condoned and appeal of the revenue is hereby admitted for adjudication. 3. DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE ACT Grounds covered Ground No. 1 (a) & (b) in ITA No. 2776/Kol/2011 for Asst Year 2008-09 Ground Nos. 3 (a) &(b) in ITA No. 927/Kol/2013 for Asst Year 2009-10 The facts in Asst Year

ZYDUS HEALTHCARE LTD,GANGTOK vs. ACIT, CIR. 3(2), GANGTOK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 139/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healhcare Limited,……..................Appellant (Successor To Zydus Healthcare Sikkim), 4Th Floor, ‘D’ Wing, Zudus Corporate Park, Scheme No. 63, Survey No. 536, Khoraj (Gandhinagar), Nr. Vaishnodevi Circle, Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar, Gujrat-382481 [Pan: Aaacg1895Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim-737101 Appearances By: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, Ca & Sonal Pandey, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 20, 2023 O R D E R

condoned the delay. The one more factor, which was available before the Tribunal was that impugned order was open for debate and it is just a Cross Objection filed by the assessee. The rights in the hands of the appellant have not been crystallized. Therefore, the Tribunal made an elaborate discussion and held that such an order be termed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)- 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AUXINITE SUPPLIERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Auxinite Suppliers Private Tax (Cc)-3(1) Limited 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan 44/2A Jain Tower, Hazra Road, Vs. Poorva, 110 Shantipally, Kolkata- Kolkata-700019, West Bengal 700017, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecb3974H Co No. 11/Kol/2025 (Arising In Ita No. 139/Kol/2025 For A.Y. 2019-20) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Auxinite Suppliers Private Tax (Cc)-3(1) Limited 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhawan 44/2A Jain Tower, Hazra Road, Vs. Poorva, 110 Shantipally, Kolkata- Kolkata-700019, West Bengal 700017, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Rajeeva Kumar & Giridhar Dhelia, Ars Revenue By : Shri V. Vidhyadhar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.04.2026

condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal in the ensuing paras. 3. The Revenue has challenged the order of ld. CIT (A) deleting the addition in respect of sale of shares to the tune of ₹4,68,45,000/- as made by the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act of ₹5,63,50,000/- in respect of sale

AWAS DEVCON PVT. LTD. ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-13(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

condoned by admitting these appeals for adjudication. ITA No. 1217/KOL/2023 for A.Y. 2015-16 04. The only issue raised and pressed at the time of hearing is against the order of ld. CIT (A) upholding the assessment order, wherein the ld. AO has made the addition of ₹3,14,43,700/- by invoking the provisions of Section

AWAS DEVCON PVT. LTD. ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-14(4), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

condoned by admitting these appeals for adjudication. ITA No. 1217/KOL/2023 for A.Y. 2015-16 04. The only issue raised and pressed at the time of hearing is against the order of ld. CIT (A) upholding the assessment order, wherein the ld. AO has made the addition of ₹3,14,43,700/- by invoking the provisions of Section

JCIT (OSD), CIR-11(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. AA INFRAPROPERTIES PVT. LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

condone the delay and proceed to admit the appeal for hearing. 3. As the issues involved in both these appeals are identical, they were heard together and are being disposed off by way of this common order. 4. We will first take up the appeal in ITA No. 200/Kol/2023 for AY 2014-15. Ground Nos. 1 to 5 taken

JCIT(OSD), CIR-II(1). , KOLKATA vs. M./S AA INFRAPROPERTIES PVT. LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

condone the delay and proceed to admit the appeal for hearing. 3. As the issues involved in both these appeals are identical, they were heard together and are being disposed off by way of this common order. 4. We will first take up the appeal in ITA No. 200/Kol/2023 for AY 2014-15. Ground Nos. 1 to 5 taken

ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S FASTFLOW SECURITIES (P) LTD, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 32/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata...................……….........…..........………...…… Appellant Vs. M/S. Fastflow Securities Pvt. Ltd.........…....…….......….....…...…....... Respondent 41, N.S. Kolkata - 70001 [Pan: Aabcf8361P] Appearances By: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri V.K. Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 15Th, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 13Th, 2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Manish Borad, Accounant Member: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 02.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 35 (Thirty Five) Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Impugned Order By Ld. Cit(A) Is Dated 02/09/2020 Which Falls Within The Period Of Pandemic Of Covid-19. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record By Revenue Explaining The Reasons For Delay, Owing To Pandemic Of Covid-19 During That Time. We Note That The Period Of Delay Falls During The Time Of Pandemic Of I.T.A. No. 32/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Fastflow Securities Pvt. Ltd

condone the delay and proceed to admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The Revenue in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer in respect of receipt of Rs.8,31,00,000/- by the assessee company treated by the Assessing Officer as unexplained income of the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 879/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2003-04 The Peerless Gen. Fin. & Inv. Co. Ltd…………......…….............................................…………….…….……...Appellant 3, Esplanade East Kolkata – 700 069 [Pan: Aabct 3042 L] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax , Circle-3(1), Kolkata…….…………..……………………..…. Respondent

delay is condoned and appeal admitted. 5. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows:- 6. The first contention of the assessee is that the showcause notice issued by the Assessing

THE PEERLESS GEN. FIN. & INV. CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 879/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2003-04 The Peerless Gen. Fin. & Inv. Co. Ltd…………......…….............................................…………….…….……...Appellant 3, Esplanade East Kolkata – 700 069 [Pan: Aabct 3042 L] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax , Circle-3(1), Kolkata…….…………..……………………..…. Respondent

delay is condoned and appeal admitted. 5. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows:- 6. The first contention of the assessee is that the showcause notice issued by the Assessing

WITZENMANN INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIR. -2(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2009-10

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate upon the matter. 5. Further, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that without prejudice to other grounds, the assessee is pressing ground nos. 2 and 3 relating to financial adjustments undertaken to eliminate material I.T.A. No. 222/Kol/2021 Witzenmann India Pvt. Ltd., AY 2009-10 5 differences in respect of capacity utilization adjustment