SATYAJIT BOSE,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD 22(2), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1365/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 July 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had not properly appreciated the documents produced by the assessee. Therefore, the issue of disallowance of expenses was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination with supporting documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a doctor, claimed expenses of Rs. 37,72,170/- for his profession. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) disallowed a significant portion of these expenses. The assessee appealed to the ITAT, arguing the expenses were necessary for his profession.

What were the issues?

Whether the expenses claimed by the assessee were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of his profession and if the lower authorities properly examined the supporting documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Ms. Shreya Loyalka, AR
For Respondent: Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.07.2026Pronounced: 23.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1365/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2018-19

Satyajit Bose Vs. ITO, Ward-22(2), Kolkata Flat No.8 KB 4, Salt Lake, Kolkatat-700 098 [PAN: ADEPB5625M] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Ms. Shreya Loyalka, AR Respondent by : Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 20.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 17.02.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2018-19.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) r.w.s. 143(3B) of the Act on 15.04.2021 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 15.04.2021, Assessee filed an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide Order dated 17.02.2026, dismissed the

ITA No.1365/Kol/2026 Satyajit Bose; A.Y: 2018-19 Appeal of the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 17.02.2026, Assessee filed the present Appeal.The only issue involved in the present Appeal is regarding disallowance of expenses amounting to Rs.37,72,170/- claimed u/s 37 of the Act. It is a case of the Assessee that the said expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of profession of the Appellant.

3.

The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in uphelding disallowing of 98.22% of the total expenses claimed by the Assessee without appreciating the fact that the Assessee is a reputed Doctor and is bound to incur expenses like local conveyance, travelling, expenses on books and periodicals and professional expenses and the total expenses was only 17.4% of the total professional receipts. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

Per Contra, the Ld. DR submitted that out of the total receipts of the Assessee was Rs. 2.20 crores out of which only Rs. 2.16 crores, approximately 98% is from a single entity i.e., Durgapur Medical Centre Private Limited and most of the expenses claimed by the Assessee for internal office, maintenance, general expenses and vehicle repair which have no direct connection with the income source. The Ld. DR relying on the findings and the conclusion of the Lower Authorities, sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

ITA No.1365/Kol/2026 Satyajit Bose; A.Y: 2018-19 5. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. The Assessee is a Doctor by profession claimed expenses of Rs.32,72,170/- which is 17.4% of total professional receipts. However, the Authorities below rejected the claim of the Assessee. Though the Assessee has produced several documents to substantiate its claim before the Assessing Officer, the same were not considered and appreciated. We have gone through the claim of the Assessee which are prima facie expenses incurred during the course of business/ profession, however, considering the fact that the Authorities have not examined the documents produced by the Assessee, we restored the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the claim of the Assessee with supporting document and decide the issue afresh. The Assessee is at liberty to produce any documents in support of his claim.

6.

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 23.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23.07.2026 DP, PS

ITA No.1365/Kol/2026 Satyajit Bose; A.Y: 2018-19 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY//

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 37

All 4,334 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →