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

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

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 of the Act could be denied the benefit of the same

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

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]

b) That the order was delivered in the emailed of the said Sri Amit Sarkar on or around 02.01.2024, but was located in the spam folder of his email in the last week of December, 2024 which was forwarded to us immediately. c) Thereafter, we contacted our regular counsel, Advocate Siddharth Agarwal of 1, Gibson Lane, Kolkata 700069 for filing

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

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

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

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

80P of the Act was required to file the return before the due date as specified in sub-section (1) of section 139 of the Act. 10. Now, on perusal of the impugned order, I find that the assessee has stated to have faced genuine hardship, which prevented it to file the return of income before the due date. Relevant

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

ACIT, CIR.-29,, KOLKATA vs. M/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CR. SOCIETY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma] I.T.A. No. 268/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Acit, Circle-29, Kolkata Vs. M/S. Steel Authority Of India Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Limited Pan: Aadas 9699 B Appellant Respondent Date Of Hearing 15.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.08.2023 For The Assessee Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Mrs. Puja Somani, Ca For The Revenue Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Order Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 20.12.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

delay of 39 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Co-operative Credit Society and registered under Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. The assessee is engaged in the business of providing credit facilities and granting of loan to its members and filed

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

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

BISHARPARA KODALIA COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. ,DUMDUM vs. ITO, WARD-49(2), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Bisharpara Kodalia Cooperative Income Tax Officer, Ward- Credit Society Ltd. 49(2), Kolkata Vs. Nabajiban, Bisharpara, Dum Dum, West Bengal-700158. (Pan: Aaaab9104B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

b) of the Act and Interest Income from West Bengal State Co-operative Bank is also exempt U/S 80P(2)(d) of the Act. But, CPC computed the income and passed order U/S 154, total income remaining same as processed originally u/s 143(1). 3.2. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal

SATGRAMR. COLLIERY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,ASANSOL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1920/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Satgram R Collery Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd……....Appellant Satgram Project, P.O Debichand Nagar, Block-Jamuria-1, Asansol, W.B. 713332. [Pan: Aajas8427K] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Asansol……..……………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhijit Banerjee, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborty, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 24, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 25, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 03.02.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. At The Time Of Hearing Of The Matter, The Learned Representative Submitted That There Was A Delay Of 115 Days In Filing The Appeal. In This Connection, The Assessee Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Submissions Of The Assessee & Examining The Contents Of The Affidavit, We Are Satisfied That The Reasons For The Delay Are Bona Fide & Deserve To Be Condoned.

B. Chakraborty, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : November 24, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : November 25, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “ld. CIT(A)”) dated

ACIT, CIR.-29,, KOLKATA vs. M/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CR. SOCIETY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

condone the delay and admit all the appeals for hearing. 3. First of all we will take up the appeals preferred by the revenue. Since grounds of appeal are common and facts are identical, we dispose of all the revenue’s appeal by a consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Grounds of appeal raised by the revenue

ACIT, CIR.-29, KOLKATA vs. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA EMP.CO.OP.CR. SOCIETY LTD , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

condone the delay and admit all the appeals for hearing. 3. First of all we will take up the appeals preferred by the revenue. Since grounds of appeal are common and facts are identical, we dispose of all the revenue’s appeal by a consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Grounds of appeal raised by the revenue