SAMANTA EYE CARE,MIDNAPORE WEST vs. I.T.O., WARD - 38(1), MIDNAPORE WEST

ITA 3168/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 September 2026AY 2019-202014 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the statement made during the survey has no evidentiary value without corroboration and set aside the addition. It also held that the delay in uploading the tax audit report was a technical breach and a reasonable cause, thus deleting the penalty.

What were the facts?

During a survey, the assessee disclosed additional income of ₹1,23,32,127/- which was not offered in the return. The Assessing Officer added this amount as unexplained money. The assessee also faced a penalty for not furnishing the tax audit report on time.

What were the issues?

Whether an addition can be made solely based on a statement recorded during a survey without corroborating evidence? Whether a delay in uploading a tax audit report constitutes a reasonable cause for waiving penalty?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 133A,Section 271B,Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AR
For Respondent: Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury
Hearing: 24.08.2026Pronounced: 16.09.2026

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

These appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 27.11.2025 for the AY 2019-20 which in turn arises out of assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 23.9.2021 and dated 27.11.2025 which arises out of the order passed u/s 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 30.03.2022. 2. The only issue raised in various grounds of appeal is against the confirmation of addition of ₹1,23,32,127/- by the ld. CIT

ITA No. 3168 & 475/KOL/2025 Samanta Eye Care; A.Y. 2019-20 (A) as mad

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →