AARYA HARSH FOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 11(1),, KOLKATA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2956/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Aarya Harsh Food Products Pvt. ITO, Ltd., Vs. Ward – 11(1), 35/3, Jogendra Basak Road Kolkata Dunlop, Kolkata – 700036, West Bengal [PAN: AAHCA6164H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Anjan Biswas, AR Respondent by: Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 29.06.2026

O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.08.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “ld. CIT(A)”) passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2017– 18.

ITA No.2956/Kol/2025/AY 2017-18 Aarya Harsh Food Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 3. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee company filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 31.01.2018, in ITR-6 through e- filed, declaring returned income of Rs.5,26,080/-. The assessee company is engaged in the trading business. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, dated 09.08.2018 was issued and served upon the assessee by e-mall. Notices u/s 142(1) of the Act, dated 23.08.2019 and 03.12.2019 were issued and served upon the assessee by e-mail. The assessee company did not upload any papers/documents in response to such notices. Thereafter, a show cause notice has been issued to the assessee stating that “this is to inform assessee that despite reasonable opportunities have been given to assessee but neither he appeared before the AO nor any petition of adjournment has been filed by him. It is seen from his income tax return for the A.Y. 2017-18 that he had deposited of Rs.1,57,87,050/- in cash during the demonetization period. Hence, he is requested to furnish written explanation about the sources of the cash deposit of Rs.1,57,87,050/- in his five bank accounts. If he failed to do so, the said sum will be added back with his total income treated as ‘Undisclosed income’ as per provision of section 68 of the Act. The reply should be uploaded within 13.12.2019 positively failing which order will be passed on merit without further intimation to him." But again, no reply has been uploaded by the assessee company in response to above show cause. In view of the above fact and circumstances, the Assessing Officer (In short, ‘the AO’) no alternative but to add the entire cash deposit of Rs.1,57,87,050/- deposited during the demonetization period which is remain unexplained has been added back with the total income of the assessee company as ‘Undisclosed income’ u/s. 68 r.w.s. 115BBE(1)(b) of

ITA No.2956/Kol/2025/AY 2017-18 Aarya Harsh Food Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act has been initiated separately.

“1. The assessment made by the Ld. A.O. and as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in the eye of law. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the fact that, the Ld. A.O. had accepted the Income shown of Rs.5,26,080/- in the ITR filed by the appellant, but the Ld. A.O. made on addition of cash deposit of Rs.1,57,87,050/- during the demonetization period, which is generated from the sale proceeds. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has ignored the fact that appellant had properly attained all physical hearing and submitted the relevant documents physically in the course of hearing in the office of the Ld. CIT(A), Kolkata-4. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has not considered the fact, that no communication was made by the department intimating, that whole physical hearing was cancelled and a fresh hearing will be made on faceless basis. 5. Hence, the humble prayer is to set-aside the order and grant for a fresh opportunity of being heard.” 6. The ld. Sr. DR supports the impugned order passed by ld. CIT(A).

Upon hearing the submission of the ld. AR of the representative 7. parties and on perusal of the order of lower authorities, we find that at the time of assessment proceedings, there was no response on

ITA No.2956/Kol/2025/AY 2017-18 Aarya Harsh Food Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO behalf of the assessee and assessment order was passed in absence of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) in its order has held that the assessee did not provide bank statement, audited financial statements, cash deposit and other documentary evidences in support the grounds of appeal. The ld. CIT(A) in its order held that appellate authority provided six opportunities to the assessee, but the assessee has only provided one submission and no supporting documents. The prayer of the ld. AR that the appeal of the assessee be remitted back to the file of AO with direction to pass fresh order after considering the documents produced by the assessee. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee has physically submitted all relevant documents against the notices issued by ld. CIT(A), Kolkata, but after two years of the pending appeal, the assessee got notices from faceless appellate department for responses and due to the confusion, the assessee did not file any documents, which he already filed physically, as a result of which, ld. CIT(A) passed an order by holding that no documents have been filed. Keeping in view the order passed by the lower authorities and considering the submission made, we are inclined to remit the appeal of the assessee to the file of the Ao for fresh consideration as the order passed by the AO is also ex-parte order. Accordingly, we set aside the order of lower authorities and appeal of the assessee is remitting back to the file of AO for fresh consideration after hearing the assessee and going over the documents placed by the assessee. The assessee is also directed to co-operate in the assessment proceedings.

ITA No.2956/Kol/2025/AY 2017-18 Aarya Harsh Food Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 29/06/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mishra) (Pradip Kumar Choubey) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Kolkata, Dated: 29/06/2026 SAMANTA आदेश�ȧĤǓ�ͧ �ͪ �\ Ē ȯͪ��/Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. \ �Ȣ�ȡ�ȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×��ȸ/ The Respondent 3. Ȳ�Ȳͬ��आयकर] �ǕÈ�/ Concerned CIT 4. आयकर] �ǕÈ�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 5. ��ȡ�Ȣ�ĤǓ�Ǔ�ͬ �, आयकर\ �Ȣ�ȣ�\ͬ ����,/ DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. �ȡ�[फाईल/ Guard file

BY ORDER,

// TRUE COPY // Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata