MANGAL SINGH,PURULIA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(2), PURULIA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 504/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2026AY 2020-20215 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It set aside the order of the PCIT and restored the issues to the file of the PCIT for re-adjudication, granting the assessee an adequate opportunity to be heard and present evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a significant delay, which was condoned. The assessee claimed entire TDS deducted, but there was a discrepancy between the declared turnover and the TDS deducted, attributed to excess TDS deduction by mistake. The assessee failed to produce reconciliation details before the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT's revisionary order was justified without allowing the assessee to present complete evidence and reconciliation of TDS. The issue also involves the condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT-DR
Hearing: 11.05.2026Pronounced: 11.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.504/Kol/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21

Mangal Singh ITO, Ward-3(2), Purulia

Ward No.3, Ranchi Road Near Vs S. P Bunglow, Purulia- 723101. (PAN: AVLPS4672A) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 11.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 11.05.2026

ORDER Per George Mathan, JM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Asansol National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as the ‘PCIT’] in appeal no.PCIT, Asanol/Revision-263/100000761528/2024 dated 07.03.2025.

2.

Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate, represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Praveen Kishore, DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

ITA No.504/Kol/2026 3. The appeal filed by the assessee is with a delay of 255 days. The assessee has filed a condonation petition which is further supported by an affidavit duly filed by the assessee. The reasons in the affidavit are plausible and reasonable. Consequently, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.

4.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that when filing the return of income, the assessee had claimed the entire TDS which has been deducted in the name of the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee is providing services and supplying materials to the Indian Railways and other government authorities. It was the submission that there has been error in the deduction of TDS and excess TDS has been deducted. It was the submission that the assessee had disclosed its turnover at Rs.7,59,93,158/- whereas as per the TDS deducted, the turnover of the assessee was liable to be taken at Rs.8,99,42,794/-. It was the submission that this was because of certain excess TDS deducted by mistake. The ld. AR has placed before us a reconciliation of Form 26AS to substantiate that the entire TDS was in respect of turnover of Rs.7,59,93,158/-, the reconciliation reads as under:

ITA No.504/Kol/2026

4.1 It was the submission that on account of mismanagement, the details have not been produced before the ld. PCIT. It was also submitted that a consequential order giving effect to the order of the ld. PCIT has also been passed by the Assessing Officer on 07.11.2025 and even before

ITA No.504/Kol/2026

the Assessing Officer, the details have not been produced. It was the submission that the assessee has not filed any appeal against the order of the Assessing Officer giving effect to the order u/s 263. It was prayed that the order of the ld. PCIT may be set aside so that that the assessee can produce all the evidences and reconciliation before the ld. PCIT for examination.

5.

In reply, the ld. CIT-DR did not raise any serious objection.

6.

Considering the submission of the ld. AR and ld. DR and also considering the reconciliation submitted by the ld. AR, the order of the ld. PCIT passed u/s 263 is set aside and the issues are restored to the file of the ld. PCIT, Asansol for re-adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11/05/2026. Sd/- Sd/- [Laxmi Prasad Sahu] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated: 11/05/2026 RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

ITA No.504/Kol/2026

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

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →