OCEAN MARINE ENVIRONMENT COATINGS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS, WARD - 2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 249 provides for condonation of delay if the Ld. CIT(A) is satisfied with the sufficient cause explained by the assessee in respect of the delay. The description available with Ld. CIT(A) for condonation of delay on the basis of sufficient cause has to be dealt with reference to sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Various

OCEAN MARINE ENVIRONMENT COATINGS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS, WARD - 2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 249 provides for condonation of delay if the Ld. CIT(A) is satisfied with the sufficient cause explained by the assessee in respect of the delay. The description available with Ld. CIT(A) for condonation of delay on the basis of sufficient cause has to be dealt with reference to sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Various

ITO, WARD - 34(4) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. GODHULI DEALCOM LLP, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection raised by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

condone the delay of 996 days in filing of the Cross Objection and admit the same for adjudication. 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) erred in deleting the securities premium reserve of Rs. 12,87,23,000/- which stood transferred

INDIAN EX-SERVICE LEAGUE(W.B.),KOLKATA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Indian Ex-Services Ito (Exemption), Ward- League, (W.B.) 1(1), Kolkata. Cp/7/3, Block-Cp, Vs. Sector-V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata -700 091. Pan: Aaati 3629 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Amiya Kumar Sahu, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Biswanath Das, Acit Date Of Hearing : 07.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee For A.Y. 2018-19 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre Dated 17.09.2021 U/S 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “I. For That The Cit(A) Fails To Understand That The Tax Is Payable On Income Not On Gross Receipts Thus Disallowance Of Revenue Expenditures Pent Is Unlawful, Whimsical Based On Surmises & Thus Order Passed By The Cit(A) Confirming The Assessment Order Is Liable To Be Set Aside.

47,34,124/- @ 15% of total receipts u/s 11 and 12 derived during the previous year under consideration and deduction u/s 11(1)(a) of the Act. The return was processed u/s 143(1) on 17.03.2021 wherein the exemption u/s 11 of the Act has been denied to the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the action of CPC, Bengaluru, the assessee

M/S MEDI DRIPS CARRIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward-12(4), 8Th Floor, R.No.818, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4, Synagogue Street, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm 8139 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Rustogi, Aca Revenue By : Shri Saurav Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.490/Xii/12(4)/10-11, Dated 11.11.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.12.2010. 2. The Said Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By Four Days. The Assessee Filed The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Expressed The Reasons Of Delay. After Verification Of Petition We Found That There Was A Reasonable Cause For Four Days Delay In Filing The Appeal. Even Ld Dr Did Not Object To Condone The Delay. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2008. Subsequently The 2 M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. Assessee Company Filed Its Revised Return Of Income On 9-12-2008

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case qua the assessee are that the assessee company filed its return of income on 30.09.2008. Subsequently the 2 M/s Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. assessee company filed its revised return of income on 9-12-2008 showing total loss at Rs.3

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

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

ITO, WARD - 1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ATN INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the revenue for adjudication. 8. The only issue to be decided in this appeal of the revenue is as to whether the ld CITA is justified in deleting the disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 15,05,244/- related to transferred assets and addition of Rs. 1,28,23,581/- on account

CHITRAGUPTA SALES & SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT(A), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 127/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Chitragupta Sales & Services Pvt. Ltd.,……Appellant 39, Shree Centre, Kali Krishna Tagore Street, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aaccc4454B] -Vs.- Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals),....Respondent Kolkata-27, 110, Shanti Pally, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhro Das, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 24, 2025 O R D E R

47 days. Hence the delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Private Limited Company, which filed its return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 29.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs.97,57,630/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS and notice under section

BHARAT TIRTHA RICE MILL,BURDWAN EAST vs. PCIT, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The Registry has pointed out that appeal is time-barred by 47 days. In order to explain the delay, the assessee has filed an application for condonation

M/S. ELCON ESTATE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 13(1), KOLKATA

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

47,620/-.\n3. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed\nan appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Subsequently, the appeal was transferred\nto the Addl/JCIT(Appeals)-1, Lucknow in accordance with section 246 of\nthe Act as per the e-Appeals Scheme, 2023, notified by the Central Board\nof Direct taxes. After considering the submissions made

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

SATYANARAYAN HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(2), KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.444/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13

condone the delay of 1472 days and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 7. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1.For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.1,64,00,000/- made by the AO on account of share capital including share premium by wrongly invoking the provisions of section

DEVNADI ADVISORY PRIVATE LIMITED,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 13(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as it has been filed after a delay of 172 days and there was no sufficient cause has been shown.

47,290/- but as per the information received from DDIT(Inv), Unit that cash of Rs. 50,00,000/- was deposited in DP Trading account with Axis Bank was transferred from Gopikar Supply Pvt. Ltd. to the account of the assessee company and it was remained unexplained. After taking approval for reopening of the case of the assessee

ITO(EXEMPTION),WARD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SURESH AMIYA MEMORIAL TRUST, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 12(1)(b) of the Act were violated. The Revenue has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd. [arising in SLP (Civil) No. 7620/2021] dated 11th July, 2022. The ld. CIT (A) allowed the relief to the assessee and the relevant extract from the order

CHAKTENTUL SKUS LTD.,,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD 1(1),, DURGAPUR

Bench: 28-02-2024 & In The Process There Is Delay Of 403 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal. The Main Reason Is The Appellant Was Suffering From Prolonged Illness & Was Under Medical Supervision. The Appellant Is Attaching A Copy Of Medical Certificate Issued By The Doctor In This Respect. 2. That The Limitation Period Prescribed In Income Tax Act, 1961 For Filing The Appeal Before This Appellate Tribunal Against The Order Of The Income Tax Officer Is 60 Days From The Date Of The Receipt Of The Impugned Order.

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 4 The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi was not justified in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer by added of Rs 47,65,290.00/- u/s section