NIPEN KUMAR PODDAR,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 50(1), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1756/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 June 2026AY 2017-20185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not decided the appeal on merits. Considering the assessee's request for an opportunity to present documents, the Tribunal decided to remit the case back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income, but failed to provide complete details of cash deposits during demonetization when asked by the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the AO added a significant sum to the assessee's income. The appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present documentary evidence before the Assessing Officer after the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No.1756/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nipen Kumar Poddar………..……………………….………………………….Appellant Dasadrone. R Gopalpur, Dasadrone, North 24, Parganas, West Bengal, 700136 [PAN No. 700136] Vs. D.C.I.T., Circle- 50(1).….……………..………………..…………….………... Respondent Income Tax Office, Manicktala, Civil Centre, Uttarapan Complex, DS-IV Kolkata- 700067 Appearances by: Asim Kumar De. CA, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : June 10, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : June 25 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 16.06.2024 of the Office of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

The brief facts of the case of the assessee is that assessee has filed return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18

ITA No.1756/KOL/2024 Assessment Year- 2017-18 declaring total income at Rs. 24,58,210/- the return of the processed and thereafter selected for scrutiny, notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued, in response to the notices assessee submitted part details. Assessing Officers has asked from the assessee to file the details of month wise deposit but that was not complied nor assessee complied the show cause notice, as a result of which Assessing Officer has added a total sum of Rs. 4,10,80,000/- deposited in cash during the demonetization period to the total income of the assessee u/s 69A of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the said order assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) wherein appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on account of non-prosecution. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied, the assessee preferred appeal before us. 4. The Ld. AR instead of arguing the merit of the case has only prayed that the appeal of the assessee be remitted back to the file of the AO, as before the AO also there was no proper compliance. The Ld. AR further submits that assessee due to some unavoidable circumstance failed to submit documents as asked by the AO, and assessment was done in absence of

ITA No.1756/KOL/2024 Assessment Year- 2017-18 documents so his prayer is that assessee has to given an opportunity to place documents before the AO.

Contrary to that Ld. DR supports the impugned order.

5.

Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties and on perusal of the impugned order, we find that CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee when there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee. The CIT(A) did not pass order on merit. At the time of assessment proceeding assessee has been asked to furnish the details of cash deposit month wise that has not be done nor assessee submit any response to the show cause notice, as a result of which assessment was done. Before us the prayer of the assessee is that assessee has to give an opportunity to place the documents as required by the Assessing Officer so that justice could be done. 6. Keeping in view the facts of the case as well as considering the order passed by the lower authority, we are remitting the appeal of the assessee to the file of the AO for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity to the assessee to place all the documentary evidences essential for the just

ITA No.1756/KOL/2024 Assessment Year- 2017-18 decision of the case. The order passed by the lower authority is hereby set aside. The appeal of the assessee is remitted back to the file of the AO for passing a fresh order after hearing the assessee. Assessee is also directed to co-operate in the remand proceedings. As a result, the appeal of the assessee be allowed for statistical purpose.

Kolkata, the 25th June, 2026.

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

Dated:. .06. 2026. DC, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

ITA No.1756/KOL/2024 Assessment Year- 2017-18 //True copy// By order

AssistantRegistrar, Kolkata Benches

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →