KRISHNA CHANDRA DAS,ALIPORE, TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS SOUTH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

sections for the Assessment Year 2019-20. ITA No(s). 2987, 2988 & 2989/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2019-20 Krishna Chandra Das. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. C.I.T (A) erred in rejecting the Appellant's prayer for condonation of delay, which was based on wrong interpretation of date of service or communication

KRISHNA CHANDRA DAS,ALIPORE, TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD- 25(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

sections for the Assessment Year 2019-20. ITA No(s). 2987, 2988 & 2989/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2019-20 Krishna Chandra Das. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. C.I.T (A) erred in rejecting the Appellant's prayer for condonation of delay, which was based on wrong interpretation of date of service or communication

HIMADRI VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, (OSD), WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

condoning the delay though appellant has submitted a reasonable cause of delay of 17 days. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in fact, there was a delay of only 17 days in filing of appeal as could be seen from Form-35, the date of service of notice of demand was 20.04.2018 and appeal was filed

SRI KRISHNENDU CHOWDHURY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-1, HALDIA, PURBA MEDINIPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11

91 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The reasons for the said delay in filing the appeal was submitted by the assessee in the said petition that the necessary papers were handed over to the old counsel to file the appeal but he failed to do so. Therefore a new counsel was searched for filing the appeal

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

DEEPAK SWITCH GEARS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd….…......................…...……………....Appellant 48/6, Suman Villa, 2Nd Floor, 155, Jessore Road, Kolkata-700055. [Pan: Aabcd1131H] Vs. Pcit, Asansol….....….........................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 158 Days. A Separate Application Of Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Wherein, It Has Been Pleaded That After Receipt Of The Impugned Order Of The Pr. Cit, The Assessee, Through Its Director, Shri Deep Kishan Saraf, Immediately Approached One Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Chartered

delay in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to decide the appeal on merits. I.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd 6. The brief facts of the case are that as noted from the order of the ld. Pr. CIT are that the assessee filed return of income for the year under

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

DCIT, CIR-2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI vs. M/S UTTAR BANGA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, COOCHBIHAR

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year:2010-11

condone the delay and admit the Revenue’s appeal for hearing. 3. The appeal as well as CO is heard together and being disposed of by way of this common order for the sake of convenience. 4. First we take up Revenue’s appeal. The grounds raised by Revenue are as under:- “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon

YUVRAAZ NOPANY,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 51(4), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits 2. On the date of hearing, the assessee had filed an application for adjournment which was rejected. It was also brought to our notice that the assessee has availed the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. Since the assessee has opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, hence

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

ITA No.1329/K/08

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Delay condoned. Leave granted. Pending hearing and final disposal of the Civil appeal, Department is restrained from recovering penalty and interest which has accrued till date. It is made clear that as far as the outstanding interest demand as of date is concerned, it would be open to the department to recover that amount in case Civil Appeal

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]

91 days and 25 days in filing of cross objections by the assessee before us. The assessee had contested the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act in its cross objections. The assessee had stated in the affidavit for condonation of delay that the assessee had come to know of the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this

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]

91 days and 25 days in filing of cross objections by the assessee before us. The assessee had contested the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act in its cross objections. The assessee had stated in the affidavit for condonation of delay that the assessee had come to know of the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this

ADIT(IT),3(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VAN OORD ATLANTA B. V., GOA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am Adit(It)-3(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Van Oord Atlanta B.V Aayakar Bhawan Poorva Room 210, 110, C/O P P Mahatme & Co. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Gabmer Apartments Vasco Da Gama, Goa – 403802. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcv 9191 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Appellant By : Shri N. B. Som, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Revenue By : Mrs. Urmila Ajay Maheshwari, C.A सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement: 20/11/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2003-04, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata, In Appeal No.50A/Cit(A)-Xl/Kol Dated 28.11.2008, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 10.03.2006. 2. The Grievances Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows:

91,070/- by the appellant in A.Y.2003-04 was not chargeable to tax as the provisions of section 41(4) of IT Act do not get attracted in the case of the appellant despite the fact that the appellant had itself offered the said amount for taxation u/s.41(4) of the l.T. Act 1961 in the said assessment year. 8. Whether

M/S. ZENITH EXPORTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

91,970/-. The said return was initially processed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(1) on 13.02.2003. Subsequently he, however, noticed that there was escapement of income of the assessee for the year I.T.A. No. 1844/KOL./2016 Assessment year: 2002-2003 Page 2 of 3 under consideration and accordingly a notice under section 148 was issued

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

condone the delay and admit these cross objections filed by assessee. 25. After giving our thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the parties and perusing the judicial decisions relied upon by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. We note that the education cess is allowable for deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. For this, we rely on the judgment