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

Sections 270A and 272A(1)(d) of the Act were brought to the notice of the appellant and immediately upon receiving such orders the appellant got in touch with the consultant on whose email id the same was sent and it was found that there was non-compliance to the notices which were issued. 5. The appellant in this regard

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

Sections 270A and 272A(1)(d) of the Act were brought to the notice of the appellant and immediately upon receiving such orders the appellant got in touch with the consultant on whose email id the same was sent and it was found that there was non-compliance to the notices which were issued. 5. The appellant in this regard

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

Sections 270A and 272A(1)(d) of the Act were brought to the notice of the appellant and immediately upon receiving such orders the appellant got in touch with the consultant on whose email id the same was sent and it was found that there was non-compliance to the notices which were issued. 5. The appellant in this regard

UNICORN DEALTRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE (CPC), , BENGALURU

Appeal are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Section 154, believing it to be an appropriate\nremedy to address the clerical mistake in the reporting of income. However,\nupon rejection of the rectification application, the appellant promptly filed an\nappeal, which unfortunately led to a delay of 9 days. This delay was neither\ndeliberate nor due to negligence but resulted from the sequence of pursuing\navailable remedies

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue for adjudication. A.Y. 2013-14 CO No. 42/KOL/2025 04. Since, the assessee has raised legal issue in cross objection filed, challenging the validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the ground that the conditions envisaged in proviso to Section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue for adjudication. A.Y. 2013-14 CO No. 42/KOL/2025 04. Since, the assessee has raised legal issue in cross objection filed, challenging the validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the ground that the conditions envisaged in proviso to Section

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 4 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue for adjudication. A.Y. 2013-14 CO No. 42/KOL/2025 04. Since, the assessee has raised legal issue in cross objection filed, challenging the validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the ground that the conditions envisaged in proviso to Section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue for adjudication. A.Y. 2013-14 CO No. 42/KOL/2025 04. Since, the assessee has raised legal issue in cross objection filed, challenging the validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the ground that the conditions envisaged in proviso to Section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MURLIDHAR RATANLAL EXPORTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the\nCOs of the assessee are partly allowed

condone the delay and admit the\nappeals of the revenue for adjudication.\nA.Y. 2013-14\nCO No. 42/KOL/2025\n04. Since, the assessee has raised legal issue in cross objection filed,\nchallenging the validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the\nIncome-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the ground that the conditions\nenvisaged in proviso to Section

THE SALESIAN SISTERS,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), EXEMPT, , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 11(2) not includable as income of the assessee in the previous year relevant to the A.Υ.: 2018-2019. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add alter or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable society and duly registered u/s 12AA

SHYAM GREENFIELD DEVELOPER PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is 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: “1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was grossly unjustified in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal ex-parte

STARPOINT VINIMAY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) WARD-1(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & 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: “1) The Learned NFAC/CIT(A) erred in confirming additions made in the assessment order by passing ex-parte order and without deciding the appeal of merits and hence the order of NFAC may be set-aside

LUDLOW JUTE COMPANY LIMITED PROVIDENT FUND,KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

46A, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. 7 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, on disposal of this appeal, material adjustments would be required in computing total income, and tax (including interest, if any, payable by and/or to the appellant) for the assessment year under reference and necessary direction

TOLLYGUNGE ESTATES (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1) of the Act which was issued on March 20, 2020 for A.Y. 2018-19. 6. The assessee then approached M/s Subash Agarwal and Associates, Advocates, in Kolkata on or around 07.04.2025 through an acquaintance for proper advice. Subsequently on the legal advice, the appeal was prepared and uploaded on the portal from their office with a delay

MIHIJAM EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 30(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 249(2) of the Act and it is also a settled principle that legal remedies or strategic mistakes made on the advice of consultants do not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay as condonation in such cases would set a precedent that encourages circumvention of statutory time limit which can significantly prejudice the finality of assessments

DCIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS (I), LTD, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2014-15

46A of the Rules. In the instant case, the explanations regarding the factors influencing the higher profitability of the eligible Assam Unit had come on the record of the ld. CIT(A), because he had decided to examine the facts of the case in depth and then adjudicate upon the matter on the basis of evidence and material, thus, gathered

KAJLA COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 27(1),, HALDIA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 144B of the Act, dated 19.09.2022. I.T.A. No.: 311/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Kajla Co-operative Agricultural Credit Society Ltd. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1) For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC was grossly erred in not condoning the delay

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay in filing of cross objections by the assessee for both the years under appeal and admit the same for adjudication. CO No. 153/Kol/2010 – Asst Year 2006-07 – Assessee CO CO No. 154/Kol/2010 – Asst Year 2007-08 – Assessee CO & CO Nos. 153 & 154/Kol/2010 Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., AY 2006-07 & 2007-08 3. The only issue

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VEDA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay in filing of cross objections by the assessee for both the years under appeal and admit the same for adjudication. CO No. 153/Kol/2010 – Asst Year 2006-07 – Assessee CO CO No. 154/Kol/2010 – Asst Year 2007-08 – Assessee CO & CO Nos. 153 & 154/Kol/2010 Veda Commercial Pvt. Ltd., AY 2006-07 & 2007-08 3. The only issue