M/S. ROHIT & COMPANY,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 34,, KOLKATA

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Prayagraj (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 02.03.2026 for the AY 2009-10.

ITA No. 1246/KOL/2026 M/s Rohit & Company; A.Y. 2009-10 assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of income.

2.1. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 30.09.2009 declaring total income of ₹1,42,45,583/-. The assessment in this case was framed under Section 143(3) of the Act on 30.12.2011 with assessed income of ₹4,45,48,130/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was re-opened after AO received information from DDIT (Inv.) Unit (1) 1, Kolkata vide letter dated 25.03.2015, wherein it is stated that assessee has dubious transaction with M/s Giriraj Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. during the relevant financial year. Accordingly, the assessment under Section 143(3)/147 of the Act was framed vide order dated 17.03.2016, assessing the total income at ₹5,68,98,130/-. Again, the case of the assessee was re-opened after the ld. AO received information from DDIT Investigation Unit 1(3), Mumbai vide letter dated 25.03.2013 and the case of the assessee was re-opened by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act on 31.03.3016. The Learned AO received information that the assessee received bogus accommodation entries in the form of bills without supplying of materials/ services to the tune of ₹10,25,298/-. Accordingly, the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued and assessee replied the same notice by submitting that the return filed on 30.09.2009 may be treated as return file in consequence to notice under Section 148 of the Act. Thereafter, the statutory notices along with questionnaire issued and finally, assessment was framed by adding ₹10,25,299 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act to the income of the assessee.

ITA No. 1246/KOL/2026 M/s Rohit & Company; A.Y. 2009-10 2.2. In the appellate proceedings, the Learned CIT (A) confirmed the order of the Learned AO.

2.3. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the case of the assessee was undisputedly opened after a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Pertinent to note that in this case the assessment u/s 143(3) was framed on 30.12.2011, as stated hereinabove. We have perused the reasons recorded by the AO as placed before us and find that no where in the said reasons there is any whisper as to failure of the assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts qua the assessment of income. In our opinion, the reopening of assessment based on the said reasons is invalid as same is not in consonance to first proviso to section 147 and therefore, the same is invalid and cannot be sustained. In terms of first proviso to Section 147 of the Act, where an assessment has been framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, the reopening of assessment can only be made beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year if the failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts qua the assessment of income is attributed to the assessee. But since, there is no whisper in the reasons recorded, therefore, the reopening of assessment is invalid. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in case of BNA Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO in ITA Nos. 154 & 155/KOL/2025 vide order dated 21.05.2025, wherein the co- ordinate Bench has held as under:-

“05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that undisputedly the case of the assessee was reopened after a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment

ITA No. 1246/KOL/2026 M/s Rohit & Company; A.Y. 2009-10 year. We also note that the assessment in this case was also framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 16.12.2016. We have perused the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer for re-opening the assessment a copy of which is available at page no.3 of the Paper Book, wherein there has been no whisper about the failure of the assessee to truly and materially disclose all the material facts necessary for the assessment of the income. For the sake of ready reference the reasons are extracted as under:- “The information is in possession of the department in respect of M/S. BNA Commerce Pvt. Ltd PAN-AABCB0727D for the A.Yr. 2014-15 received fund amounting to Rs.4,33,00,000/- from various shell companies managed and controlled by Shri Dilip Kumar Gupta, an entry operator. The same was received from the Office of ADIT(Inv), Unit-3(4), Kolkata vide No. 3047 dated 02.08.2018 A search and seizure operation u/s. 132 was conducted in the residence and various office premises of Shri Dilip Kumar Gupta on 15/12/2016. During the course of search and seizure operation, statements of Shri Dilip Kumar Gupta was recorded on oath and vide statement he admitted to be involved in the activities of providing accommodation entries in the guise of Shares purchase, unsecured loans and bogus billing in lieu of commission. He facilitated the meeting of parties who need bogus bills and parties who provided the entry of bogus bills without involving himself or his dummies in the process in lieu of commission. M/s BNA Commerce Pvt. Ltd. PAN- AABCB0727D is one of the beneficiary received Rs.3,30,00,000/- from M/s Shivhari Distributors Pvt. Ltd, Rs.65,00,000/- from M/s. Dolphin Shoppers Pvt. Ltd., and Rs.38,00,000/- from M/s. Pearltree Dealmark Pvt. Ltd. managed and controlled by Shri Dilip Kumar Gupta. Under the circumstances, I have reason to believe that the above income of the assessee has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of sec. 147 of the 1.T. Act, 1961.” 06. Therefore, reopening of assessment beyond four years has been made in violation of first proviso to Section 147 of the Act which provides that where assessment has been framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, no reopening of assessment can be made u/s 147 of the Act if there is no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts qua the assessment of income. On perusal ofthe reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act as extracted above reveals that there is no whisper of failure of the assessee. Therefore, reopening is invalid and against the provisions of the Act. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT Vs. CEAT Ltd. reported in [2022] 449 ITR 171 (SC). We therefore, respectfully following the same quash the reopening of assessment as well as the order framed consequently. 07. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issue.”

ITA No. 1246/KOL/2026 M/s Rohit & Company; A.Y. 2009-10 2.3.1. Considering the facts of the case in the light of the above decision, we are inclined to quash the reopening of assessment.

Order pronounced on 22.07.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 22.07.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT DR, ITAT, 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy//

Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata