SHIW KANT SHAW,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD 37(3), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2352/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 July 2026AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's non-compliance at both the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) levels. However, in the interest of justice, the appeal was remitted back to the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee an opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee was a non-filer for AY 2017-18 but deposited substantial cash during demonetization. Despite notices, the assessee failed to provide explanations or file a return, leading to an ex-parte assessment where total credits of Rs. 1,92,21,333 were added as unexplained income.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to explain the cash deposits despite prior non-compliance, and if the ex-parte assessment order should be set aside.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No 2352/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shiw Kant Shaw...........................................................................................Appellant 32/A, Maharshi Devendra Road, Kolkata- 700006 [PAN No. BDHPS0288K ] Vs. ITO Ward 37(3).........................…………..…………………....……….Respondent 3 Govt. Place (East), Kolkata- 700069 Appearances by: Souvik Guha, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Praveen Das Chowdhury, (Sr. D.R.), appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : July 02, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : July 16 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.11.2024 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), passed under Section 144 of the Assessment Year 2017-18 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). At the very outset it appears from the report of registry that appeal has been filed by a delay of 261 days, for this a petition to condone the delay has been filed by the assessee. Going over the contents of the affidavit, delay is hereby condoned.

2.

The brief facts of the case of the assessee is that on examination of the Assessment Order u/s144 of the Act dated 18.12.2019 it is observed that the appellant was a non-filer for the A.Y. 2017-18, yet had deposited substantial amount of cash amounting to Rs

ITA No.2352/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2017-18 32,32,800/ in the Kotak Mahindra Bank and Allahabad Bank having Account No-6611794703 & 50048046958 respectively during the demonetisation period (9th November, 2016 to 30th December, 2016) as reported under Operation Clean Money. Therefore, the Notice u/s 142(1) was issued by the AO on 07.12.2017 calling the appellant to prepare a true and correct return of income in respect of such cash deposits and corroborate the same with supporting evidences. However, neither such return of income nor any information/details were filed by the appellant. Thus, the AO proceeded with assessment proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of Assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer examined the bank account details of the appellant and found total credit entries amounting to Rs. 1,92,21,333/, and since appellant did not offer any explanation and remained non-compliant throughout the proceedings, the assessing officer treated total credits of Rs.1,92,21,333/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the IT Act and added to the total income of the appellant. The present appeal is against the assessment order issued by the AO dated 18/12/2019. Aggrieved by the said order assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) wherein appeal of the assessee has been dismissed in limine without considering the merit as there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied the assessee preferred appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only prayed that the appeal of the assessee be remitted back to the file of the AO as assessment was also done ex-parte when the assessee failed to put forth any explanation at the time of assessment proceedings. Contrary to that Ld. DR supports the impugned order. 2

ITA No.2352/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2017-18 4. Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties and on perusal of the order of the lower authorities, we find that at the time of assessment proceeding there was no compliance as the result of which assessment was done being an ex-parte. Before the CIT(A) also, there was non-compliance and CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine.Interest of justice demands to give an opportunity to the assessee to place his case before the Assessing Officers.Considering the order passed by the AO as well as CIT(A), we are remitting the appeal of the assessee to the file of the AO to pass a fresh order. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Kolkata, the 16th July , 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member

DC Dated: 16. 07.2026.

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3

ITA No.2352/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2017-18 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches

ITA No.2352/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2017-18

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →