Case LawHigh Court › Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2,...

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Kolkata v. Srg Earth Resources Private Limited

High Court 09 Jun 2025 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Kolkata v. Srg Earth Resources Private Limited
Date of order
09 Jun 2025
Assessment year(s)
2017-18
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Kolkata v. Srg Earth Resources Private Limited, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Consequently, the appeal stands rejected.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/111/2025 IA NO: GA/1/2025, GA/2/2025 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA VS SRG EARTH RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED BEFORE : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM -A N D- HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS) DATE : 9[th] June, 2025. Appearance :Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. …for appellant The Court :- This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenging the order dated September 28, 2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `A’ Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA 165/Kol/2022, for the assessment year 2017-18 and the order dated September 11, 2023 passed in an miscellaneous application filed by the Department in MA No.29/Kol./2023. We have heard Mr. Amit Sharma, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/department. There is a delay of 445 days in filing the appeal. We have perused the affidavit filed in support of the application and we find that the explanation offered is wholly unacceptable and sufficient cause has not been shown for not preferring the appeal within the period of limitation. Even going by the date on which the learned Tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous application, that is, on 11[th] September, 2023, the appeal is still time-barred by 445 days. In the absence of any acceptable explanation, we are not persuaded to exercise any discretion in favour of the appellant/department. Accordingly, the application being IA NO: GA/1/2025 is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal stands rejected. The stay application IA NO: GA/2/2025 stands dismissed. The substantial questions of law suggested by the department are left open. . (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ.) (CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan