NANDILAL RUNGTA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-V, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

section 263 order of the ld CIT before the tribunal together with a delay condonation petition as the assessee has got a good case and fair chance of succeeding in appeal. In support of this, the ld AR relied on the following decisions for condonation of delay :- (a) Decision of co-ordinate bench of Hyderabad Tribunal in the case

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

condone delay would result in foreclosing a suitor from putting forth his cause. There is no presumption that delay in approaching the court is always deliberate. This Court has held that the words "sufficient cause" under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice.” 3. In the present case

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

LAXMIDHAN TRADELINK PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Bench raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law as well as on facts of the case by passing order u/s 250 dated 20/03/2023 dismissing the appeal filed

WESTERN CONGLOMERATE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(4),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

condone the delay\nand adjudicate the appeal in the ensuing paras.\nThe only issue involved in both the appeals is against the confirmation\nof disallowance by the Id. CIT (A) as made by the Id. AO u/s 36(1)(va)\nof the Income-tax Act, 1961.\nThe Id. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is\nengaged

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 35(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz)

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act on the ground that there was non- compliance to Chapter XVIIB of the Act. The ld. Assessing Officer determined the total taxable income of the assessee-Society at Rs.21,45,285/- for the assessment year 2017-18. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). After considering

DCIT, CIR-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BHUBRIGHAT TEA CO. PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07 Dcit, Cicle-4(1), V/S. M/S Bhubrighat Tea Co. P-7, Chowringhee Pvt. Ltd. 6D, Shyamkunj, Square, Kolkata-69 12C, Lord Sinha Road, Kolkata-71 [Pan No.Aabcb 2972 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arivnd Agarwal, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-09-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 11-10-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 23.01.2015. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-4, Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 17.12.2008 For Assessment Year 2006-07. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By Revenue Are Reproduced Hereinbelow:- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Cess On Green Leaf Of Rs.1172020/- Is An Allowable Expenditure Ignoring The Fact That Green Leaf Is Attributable To Agriculture Activities Which Is Taxable Under State Agriculture Income Tax Beyond The Purview Of Central Income Tax & As Per Rule 8 Only 40% Of The Composite Income Is Taxable Under Central Income Tax & Moreover On The Same Issue As Slp Is Pending Before Apex Court. 2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred On Facts As Well As In Law In Holding That Employees Contribution To Pf Of Rs.244399/- Is Allowed If Deposited Before Filing Of Return, Ignoring The Fact That

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. First issue raised by Revenue in this appeal is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer for an amount of ₹11,72,020/- on account of cess on green leaf. 4. Briefly stated facts are that assessee is a private limited company and engaged

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA vs. ALCOM INVESTMENT PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

delay is here by condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee being a company namely Alcom Investment Pvt. Ltd. formerly known as Garima Vanijya Pvt. Ltd engaged in the business of non-banking financial institution. The assessee filed its original return of income for AY 2008-09 declaring total income

WESTERN CONGLOMERATE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(4),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

condone the delay\nand adjudicate the appeal in the ensuing paras.\nThe only issue involved in both the appeals is against the confirmation\nof disallowance by the Id. CIT (A) as made by the Id. AO u/s 36(1)(va)\nof the Income-tax Act, 1961.\nThe Id. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is\nengaged

K.C.A. CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

delay is condoned and the appeal is taken for hearing. 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee challenged the impugned order of ld. CIT (Exemption) thereby submitting that ld. CIT (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application of the assessee on the ground being wrong selection of the Section code. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that

SRI DILIP KUMAR DAS,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-50(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 473 & 640/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumar Das -Vs- Ito, Ward-50(1), Kolkata [Pan: Adspd 7417 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 144 of the Act. Therefore we are inclined to levy the cost over the assessee for Rs. 1000/- on account of his negligent behavior in pursuing the matter before the AO. Accordingly, the assessee is directed to deposit a total sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) only in the Prime Minister Relief Fund. In view

SRI DILIP KUMAR DAS,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-50(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 473 & 640/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumar Das -Vs- Ito, Ward-50(1), Kolkata [Pan: Adspd 7417 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 144 of the Act. Therefore we are inclined to levy the cost over the assessee for Rs. 1000/- on account of his negligent behavior in pursuing the matter before the AO. Accordingly, the assessee is directed to deposit a total sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) only in the Prime Minister Relief Fund. In view

GULMOHAR TOWERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 10(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone the delay and\nadjudicate the appeal in the ensuing paras.\nThe only issue raised in ground no.1 is against invalid reopening of\nassessment u/s 147 of the Act made by the AO. The assessee has\nalso assailed the order of Id. CIT (A) simply setting aside the issue to\nthe file of the Id. AO without deciding the same

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PRATIK INTERNATIONAL INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

285 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reason for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. A.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the submission made by the A.R. and the judicial pronouncement that a case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. PRATIK INTERNATIONAL INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

285 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reason for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. A.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the submission made by the A.R. and the judicial pronouncement that a case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay

SHRI SURESH KUMAR SHARMA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 23(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) disputing the addition of Rs.7,45,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of cash deposits found to be made in his Bank account and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee with the notices issued by him fixing

SATISH KUMAR LAKHMANI,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"ी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. टी. वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

condoned by the Ld. CIT, the delay in filing return of income stands late. Hence the assessee is not eligible for the benefit of exemption u/s. 11(2) of the Act. In view of the above, it is evident that the order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act as above is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial

JAIKISHAN LAKHMANI ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 10 , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

condoned by the Ld. CIT, the delay in filing return of income stands late. Hence the assessee is not eligible for the benefit of exemption u/s. 11(2) of the Act. In view of the above, it is evident that the order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act as above is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial

REETA LAKHMANI,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 10 , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

condoned by the Ld. CIT, the delay in filing return of income stands late. Hence the assessee is not eligible for the benefit of exemption u/s. 11(2) of the Act. In view of the above, it is evident that the order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act as above is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial