DCIT, KOLKATA vs. HIMADRI SPECIALITY CHEMICAL LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.\n3. The issue raised in ground no.1 to 4 and 8 is against the order of Id. CIT (A) deleting the Arm's Length Price adjustment of ₹3,97,99,637 as made by the Id. AO/Transfer Pricing Officer on account interest on loan.\n3.1. The facts in brief are that

D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KILBURN ENGINEERING LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the revenue. ITA No.1987/Kol/2013-M/s. Kilburn Engineering Ltd. A.Y.2009-10 4. As far as the issue raised by the revenue in the grounds of appeal is concerned, the same relates to eligibility of the assessee’s for exemption u/s 54G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) in respect of a sum of Rs.10

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(2), KOLKATA vs. ESKAG SANJEEVANI PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 03. The issue raised in ground no. 1 is against the order of ld. CIT (A) deleting the addition of ₹4,04,50,000/- as made by the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act in respect of unsecured loans taken during the year. 04. The facts in brief are that

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MANISH COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee is NBFC company engaged in the business of advancing loan and investing in shares and securities. The assessee company filed its return of income for AY 2018-19 declaring total income of Rs. 30,64,750/- and book profit

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BATA INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed and the CO is dismissed

Bench: the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in ITA No. 1844/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2009-10;

delay is hereby condoned and the CO is admitted for adjudication, along with the primary appeal. Both these matters are being disposed of through a single order. 2. In this case, the Ld. AO made a number of additions which were challenged before the Ld. CIT(A), who is seen to have granted relief substantially. 2.1 Aggrieved with the impugned

I.T.O WD - 55(4),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. SRI SUVAPRASANNA BHATTACHARJEE., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, J.M. &Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 29/12/ 2011. 2. The revenue flied this appeal with a delay of 09 days. The Revenue has filed a petition dated 24.01.2013 praying for condonation of delay. We find the reasons stated in the condonation petition appear to be reasonable. The Ld.AR submitted no objection

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SDR MEGHNATH INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The brief facts of the case of the appellant are that the assessee an Investment Company with investments in various unlisted manufacturing companies. During the relevant Financial Year, share applications amounting to Rs. 8,75,00,000/- were received from various share applicants to whom equity share allotted

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

condone the delay of 52 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17,29,58,525/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of difference between the liabilities as on 31.03.2006 and as on 31.03.2007 payable to the financial

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

condone the delay of 52 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17,29,58,525/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of difference between the liabilities as on 31.03.2006 and as on 31.03.2007 payable to the financial

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

condone the delay of 52 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17,29,58,525/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of difference between the liabilities as on 31.03.2006 and as on 31.03.2007 payable to the financial

THE WEST BENGAL POWER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

condone the delay of 52 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17,29,58,525/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of difference between the liabilities as on 31.03.2006 and as on 31.03.2007 payable to the financial

M/S. BHUMI NIRMAN PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 10(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

delay is hereby condoned and this appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. In this case the assessee filed his return of income on 06.01.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 3,00,857/-. Subsequently, the case was picked up for scrutiny for verifying the sale of property reported in Form 26AS. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred

BLUE WATER PICTURE & PRODUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.WARD-4(2), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.415/Kol/2019 (िनधा"रणवष"S / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Blue Water Pictures & Vs. Ito, Ward-4(2), Kolkata Productions

condonation of delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. We note that date of service of assessment order as per form 35 filed by the assessee is 01.09.2017 and date of filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A) is 07.10.2017. As per clause (b) of sub section 2 of section 249 of the Act, the appeal shall be presented

DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S RAV DRAVYA PVT LTD , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenues is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 103/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Rav Dravya Private Limited Tax, Circle-4(1), Kolkata Hastings Chambers, 2Nd Floor Vs 7/C, Kiran Shankar Roy Road Kolkata - 700001 Pan : Aabcr3154Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Revenue By : Md. Ghayasuddin, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 13/03/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. This Revenue’S Appeal Is Time Barred By 198 Days & The Petition Seeking Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed Stating That The Delay In Filing Of This Appeal Was Attributable To The Restrictions Imposed Due To Covid-19 Pandemic. We Have Heard Both The Sides & Find That There Is Reasonable Cause For Delay In Filing Of The Appeal On Time. Hence We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing.

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The revenue has raised the following revised grounds of appeal before this Tribunal:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in admitting new documentary evidence during the appeal proceedings in violation of Rule

D.C.I.T., CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. NAVIN CONSTRUCTION & CREDIT PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

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

condone the delay and admit the cross-objection for adjudication. 5. Facts in brief are that the assessee is a private limited company. Income of Rs. 45,44,400/-, was declared in the e-return for Assessment Year 2015-16 filed on 29/09/2015. The same was subsequently revised. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny

MADINA RICE MILL PVT. LTD.,HOOGHLY vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal. 3. As the facts and circumstances are exactly identical in all the appeals of the assessee, hence we take ITA No. 2468/KOL/2024 and decide the issue accordingly. 4. At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee pressed the ground no.5 which is extracted below:- “FOR THAT the Ld. Commissioner

MADINA RICE MILL PVT. LTD.,HOOGHLY vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal. 3. As the facts and circumstances are exactly identical in all the appeals of the assessee, hence we take ITA No. 2468/KOL/2024 and decide the issue accordingly. 4. At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee pressed the ground no.5 which is extracted below:- “FOR THAT the Ld. Commissioner