UMANG COMMO TRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-2(4) PRESENTLY I.T.O., WARD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal is time barred by 2122 days. A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed, wherein, it has been pleaded that the impugned order of the CIT(A) was never served upon the assessee. Though, the order was uploaded on the website portal of the Income Tax Department, however, the assessee was not aware of the same. It has been submitted that the assessee came to know about the passing (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Umang Commo Trade Pvt. Ltd of the order when he received notification regarding the same on 13.12.2022 and therefore, the appeal was filed within the limitation period. Without prejudice to the above submissions, it has been pleaded that the business of the assessee had almost come to standstill during the years 2017 to 2021 and he was in financial ruin. He had an extremely difficult time even meeting his family expenses. Thereafter, the Covid Pandemic period started and under the circumstances, the assessee has reasonable cause for not filing appeal within the limitation period. However, the main contention of the ld. AR has been that the impugned order of the CIT(A) was never served upon the assessee. The assessee has come to know about the passing of the impugned order of the CIT(A) only on 13.12.2022. The said contention of the assessee has not been rebutted by the Department by providing on file any evidence that the impugned order of the CIT(A) was served upon the assessee before 13.12.2022. In view of the aforesaid submissions and considering the interests of justice, the delay occurred in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned.

Now, coming to the merit of the appeal, the assessee in this appeal has agitated the confirmation of addition of a sum of Rs.3,00,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act treating the share capital and share premium received by the assessee as unexplained income of the assessee.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned assessment order to submit that though the Assessing Officer in para 2 of the assessment order has observed that the assessee had submitted mere preliminary document in the office through DAK (to the receipt clerk), however, he has not discussed any (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Umang Commo Trade Pvt. Ltd of the evidences/documents furnished by the assessee. He has further submitted that the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had not made any compliance to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer which was factually wrong. In fact, the assessee duly furnished the documents to prove the identity and financial worth of the share subscribers and genuineness of the transaction. The ld. counsel, in this respect, has relied upon the following documents: