Income Tax Officer, Ward 13(1) Kolkata v. Shivmangal Stock Management Private Limited And Ors
High Court
28 Aug 2025 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Income Tax Officer, Ward 13(1) Kolkata v. Shivmangal Stock Management Private Limited And Ors
Date of order
28 Aug 2025
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Income Tax Officer, Ward 13(1) Kolkata v. Shivmangal Stock Management Private Limited And Ors, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE
APOT/151/2025 IA No. GA/1/2025, GA/2/2025
INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 13(1) KOLKATA
VS. SHIVMANGAL STOCK MANAGEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS
BEFORE :
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)
Dated : August 28, 2025.
Appearance:Mr. Samarjit Roy Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. ...for Appellant Mr. A. K. Upadhyay, Adv. Ms. Mahasmriti Ghosh, Adv. …for the Respondents
THE COURT: There is a delay of 706 days in preferring the instant intra Court appeal.
We have perused the affidavit in support of GA/1/2025 wherein prayer has been made to condone the delay. To say the least, nothing convincing has been stated for the Court to exercise any discretion in favour of the appellant/department for condonation of inordinate delay of 706 days. The stand taken by the department clearly shows that the concerned file was moving from one officer to another and the appeal which ought to have been filed within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the impugned order was filed after the period of 706 days. In absence of any acceptable explanation for the inordinate delay, we are not persuaded to exercise any discretion in favour of the appellant/department.
Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay being GA/1/2025 is dismissed.
Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ.)
(CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)
sm/sp3
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.