GOPMAHAL SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR. 38, MIDNAPUR

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication on merit. 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. I.T.A. No.76/KOL/2024; AY 2015-16 “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 denying the deduction

GOPMAHAL SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR. 38, MIDNAPORE

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication on merit. 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. I.T.A. No.76/KOL/2024; AY 2015-16 “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 denying the deduction

PAHALAMPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD., ,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD 23(1), , HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Pahalampur Samabay Krishi Ito, Ward-23(1), Hooghly Unnayan Ltd.

2. Shri Somnath Ghosh represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal has been filed by the assessee with a delay of 967 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay. The reasons in the application are plausible and valid. Consequently, the delay

DURGAMONDAP SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYN SAMATI LTD. ,ITO, WARD NO-49(1), KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD NO- 49(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

delay is hereby condoned and the matter is taken up for adjudication. 2. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has argued that Section 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act is the critical part of the statute which would determine whether any assessee claiming relief u/s 80P

BEGPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,BHERUAPARA vs. ACIT,CIR-1, BURDWAN. , BURDWAN

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

condone the delay as the same is for sufficient and good reasons and accordingly admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) upholding the order of the Assessing Officer (in short ld. 'AO') wherein deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of income

COAL EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 36(1), , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

delay is hereby condoned. 3 I.T.A. No. 302/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Coal Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee filed return of income declaring total income at Nil. The assessee claimed deduction u/s 80P of the Act to the tune of Rs. 97,78,220/-. The return

NABARUN S K U S LTD.,NADIA vs. I.T.O.WARD-41(1), KRISHNANAGAR

Condonation of delay under clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for returns of income claiming deduction u/s 80P

THE W.B. STATE CO-OP AGRI AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 32, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2006-07

delayed by 295 days and a condonation petition has been filed. In the said application the assessee has submitted as under: 2 The W.B. State Co-operative Agriculture & Rural Development Bank Ltd., “In the Form No. 36 relating to the aforesaid Appeal filed by the WBSCARDB Ltd., date of order of the CIT was erroneously mentioned as January

PANDAVESWAR COLLIERY EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & 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: “a) For that the intimation passed under section 143(1) as well as rectification order u/s 154 was issued in violation of provisions 143(1)(a)(v) of Income Tax Act, 1961 for the time being

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 1.3 Since the issues are common, all the eight appeals were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 466/KOL/2018: “1) That on the facts and circumstances

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 1.3 Since the issues are common, all the eight appeals were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 466/KOL/2018: “1) That on the facts and circumstances

M/S COAL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 1.3 Since the issues are common, all the eight appeals were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 466/KOL/2018: “1) That on the facts and circumstances

TAKDAH LINGDING GPSKUS LTD.,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), DARJEELING

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 154 of the Act dated 31.05.2019. 2. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that ld. CIT(A) did not consider his condonation petition and rejected the ground of delay and dismissing the I.T.A. No.: 211/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Takdah Lingding GPSKUS Limited. appeal only on the point of limitation. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that

NAKASHIPARA THANA CO-OPERATIVE AGRIL MARKETING SOCIETY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR, CPC, BENGALURU

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

Bench: : Sri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं"या/ I.T.A. No. 504/कोल/2021 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Nakashipara Thana Co-Operative Agril Marketing (अपीलाथ")/Appellant Society Limited………………….…………………. [Pan: Aaban 3131 H] Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru..........................................(""यथ")/Respondent Appearances By: कोई नह"ं/None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Sh. Biswanath Das, Cit, D/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of The Hearing : August 22Nd, 2022 आदेश उ"ोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 8Th , 2022 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2019-20 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated

2) of section 119, I observe that The Board (CBDT) has the power to condone such delay. In the instant case the assessee faced genuine hardship, which mainly arised on account of resetting of login password, which is necessary for e-filing the return. I also observe that the genuineness of claim of the assessee regarding deduction u/s. 80P

SAHEBGANJ NO.1 ANCHALIK SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2(3), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay and decide this appeal on merit. 3. The assessee has taken six grounds of appeal, which contains pleadings on general points also, namely that assessee may be given liberty to modify the grounds etc. In brief the sole grievance of the assessee is that the ld. Pr. CIT has erred in exercising the powers under section

NORTH HOWRAH CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 46(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2012-13

condone the impugned 13 days delay to be neither intentional nor deliberate. The case is now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. The assessee’s sole substantive ground challenges the CIT(A)’s action affirming the assessment findings amounting to ₹7,02,495/- as under:- ITA No.1658/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 North Howrah Co-Op. Credit Society

PANISHEOLA SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LIMITED,HOOGHLY vs. I.T.O., WARD - 23(1), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2019-2020 Panisheola Samabay Krishi Deputy Commissioner Of Unnayan Samity Limited, Income Tax, Circle 4(2), Bhagabatipur, Panisheola, Vs Kolkata, Haripal, Hooghly - 712405 Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, (Pan: Aaaap8740R) Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 (Appellant) (Respondent)

condonation of delay in filing the return. However, before us, the issue is regarding prima facie adjustment made u/s. 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act and as discussed above, such power of making the prima facie adjustment towards deduction u/s. 80P of the Act came to CPC only from 1.4.2021 and thus, the alleged disallowance by CPC is beyond

BURDWAN SATGACHIA JANAKALYAN SOCIETY,,MEMARI, BURDWAN vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1),, BURDWAN

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Burdwan Satgachia Janakalyan Ito Ward 1(1) Society, Aaykar Bhawan, Court Satgachia, Memari, Burdwan, Compound, Burdwan, Vs. West Bengal-713422 West Bengal-713101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaab8302K Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2025

condone the delay and admit the appeal of adjudication. Burdwan Satgachia Janakalyan Society; A.Y. 2012-13 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee during the year did not file any return of income. The assessee is a co-operative society which was registered on 22.02.2008 and has been carrying on its activities since then said society have been