M/S. ALMA ASSETS CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD 4(3),, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 136/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 April 2026AY 2012-20133 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment were cryptic and vague, lacking any satisfaction of the AO regarding escaped income. Consequently, the reopening and the assessment framed were quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed its return of income, and the case was reopened based on information that the assessee was a beneficiary of unaccounted income of ₹50 lacs. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice for reopening and completed the assessment with an addition of ₹50 lacs.

What were the issues?

Whether the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment under Section 147 were sufficient and satisfied the conditions for reopening.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, AR
For Respondent: Ms. Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, DR
Hearing: 08.04.2026Pronounced: 28.04.2026

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 10.12.2025 for the AY 2012-13.

2.

At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee pressed only ground no.1, which is against the proceeding initiated u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of reasons recorded which are not reasons at all and there is no reason to form the belief in the reason recorded for initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

4.

In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT (A) restored the appeal to the file of the Ld. AO for rejection on the ground that assessment is required to be framed afresh.

5.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record including the reasons recorded by the AO, we observe from the reasons recorded that the Ld. AO has only noted in the three line reasons that assessee is one of the beneficiaries who had got credit in his bank account of ₹50 lacs during A.Y. 2011-12 from bank account of M/s Sanhit Vincom Pvt. Ltd. We note from the said reasons that the nowhere the Ld. AO has recorded any satisfaction that income of the assessee has escaped assessment to this extent.For the sake of ready reference, the reasons were extracted below:

“It has been found that M/s Amla Assets Consultancy Pvt Ltd., the assessee company under the charge is one of the beneficiaries who had got credited in its bank account a sum of ₹50,00,000/- during the financial year 2011-12 from bank account of M/s Sanhit Vincome Pvt. ltd.” 6. A perusal of the above reasons reveals that the reasons are very cryptic and vague and without any satisfaction of the Ld. AO as to

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 28.04.2026 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

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →