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

SWAPAN CHANDRA MANDAL,PURULIA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(3), PURULIA, PURULIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 131/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Swapan Chandra Mandal,.......................Appellant Village & P.O. Chelyama, District- Purulia-723145 [Pan: Akepm1916H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,..............................Respondent Ward-3(3), Purulia, I.T. Office Building, South Lake Road, Purulia-723101 Appearances By: Shri P.J. Bhide, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Altaf Hossain, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 11, 2024 O R D E R

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 8. Before proceeding further, we would like to take note of the complete assessment order, which is a non-speaking and sketchy one. It reads as under:- “Return of income for the A.Y. 2011-12 was electronically furnished on 20.03.2017 disclosing total income

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

condoned the delay in filing the appeals and cross objections. For AY 2013-14, the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act was quashed as it violated the proviso to Section 147. The appeals filed by the Revenue related to this issue were dismissed as infructuous. For AY 2015-16 and AY 2016-17, the Revenue

RAJPAL GUPTA,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 47(1),, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1276/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Rajpal Gupta,…………………………………..……Appellant 103/25, Foreshore Road, Shibpur, Howrah-711102, West Bengal [Pan:Adtpg4725E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-47(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri Avijit Ghosal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: October 30, 2025 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. Facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income for the AY 2019-20 declaring taxable income at Rs.6,32,140/-. On the basis of inputs received from CGST authority, the Directorate of Income Tax (Inv.), Kolkata conducted an inquiry and it is found that Mr. Koleshwar Ravidas

D.C.C.T.,CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S NARSINGH ISPAT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1513/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.........Appellant Circle-3(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 4Th Floor, Room No. 19, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- M/S. Narsingh Ispat Limited,....................Respondent 16, Strand Road, Fairly Place, 15Th Floor, Diamond Heritage, Unit-1512, Kolkata-700001 [Pan: Aaccn0208J] Appearances By: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 18, 2023 O R D E R

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are as under:- (1) That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the adition of Rs.4,00,00,000/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C made

SRIDHARPUR CO-OPERATIVE BANK,BARDHAMAN vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), BURDWAN

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

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: ITA No.: 672/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sridharpur Co-Operative Bank. “1) That the Learned CIT (Appeal) NFAC has erred in upholding the addition made by the A.O. under section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.\n3. Since these appeals relate to the related companies and issues\ninvolved are mostly common, therefore these are being decided by this\ncommon order for the sake of convenience and brevity. First of all, we\nshall take 1395/KOL/2025 (assessee's appeal) A.Y. 2015-16 in case of\nBalmukund Sponge and Iron

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Since these appeals relate to the related companies and issues involved are mostly common, therefore these are being decided by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. First of all, we shall take 1395/KOL/2025 (assessee’s appeal) A.Y. 2015-16 in case of Balmukund Sponge and Iron

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Since these appeals relate to the related companies and issues involved are mostly common, therefore these are being decided by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. First of all, we shall take 1395/KOL/2025 (assessee’s appeal) A.Y. 2015-16 in case of Balmukund Sponge and Iron

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Since these appeals relate to the related companies and issues involved are mostly common, therefore these are being decided by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. First of all, we shall take 1395/KOL/2025 (assessee’s appeal) A.Y. 2015-16 in case of Balmukund Sponge and Iron

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Since these appeals relate to the related companies and issues involved are mostly common, therefore these are being decided by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. First of all, we shall take 1395/KOL/2025 (assessee’s appeal) A.Y. 2015-16 in case of Balmukund Sponge and Iron

GOPAL & SONS HUF,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 32(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Since these appeals relate to the related companies and issues involved are mostly common, therefore these are being decided by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. First of all, we shall take 1395/KOL/2025 (assessee’s appeal) A.Y. 2015-16 in case of Balmukund Sponge and Iron

GARRAH SKUS LIMITED,BANKURA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1),, BANKURA

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

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 an ex parte order of assessment and dismissal of appeal on ground of limitation are illegal, improper and arbitrary in nature. 2. For that Ld. AO, NFAC, in consideration of the facts

HIRANMOY DAS,DURGAPUR vs. PCIT, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: 25.04.2022. 3. That There Is A Delay Of 728 (Seven Hundred & Twenty-Eight) Days In Filing The Appeal.

condoning the said delay. 2. The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Asansol (in short 'the Ld. PCIT] dated 24.02.2022, passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.1 Aggrieved with this action, the assessee

DCIT CC 1 4 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. GREYFORCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

condone the delay and admit the appeal for\nhearing.\nThe first issue raised by the Revenue is against the deletion of\naddition of ₹3,83,34,071/- by the Id. CIT (A) as made by the Id. AO\non account of freight payment exceeding to ₹35,000/- to a single\ntransporter in a single day in violation of Section

MRS. PREMLATA TEKRIWAL ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 10, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkey

condone the delay and admit all these five appeals. 3. The assessees in these cases had derived income from business. They have filed their return of income u/s 139 of the Act. The Assessing Officer received information from DGIT(Inv.) that each of these assessees have made fictitious purchases. Based on this information The assessment of each of these assessments