AASHKIRAN COMMODITIES PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 4(3), KOLKATA,, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1972/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 August 2026AY 2019-20205 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was not provided an opportunity to cross-examine Shri Virendra Dhannani, whose statement was crucial to the assessment. The assessment order was set aside to allow for cross-examination and adherence to principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee company engaged in transactions with M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited, which were later deemed bogus by the Assessing Officer. The AO relied on the statement of Shri Virendra Dhannani and the fact that M/s Alegra Traders was struck off from the MCA portal.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer is valid without providing the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine the witness whose statement was relied upon. Whether the principles of natural justice were followed during the assessment proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, AR
For Respondent: Shri Ambrish Mishra, DR
Hearing: 03.08.2026Pronounced: 21.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1972/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2019-20

Aashkiran Commodities Private Vs. ITO, Ward-4(3), Kolkata Limited 23A Netaji Subhash Road, Kolkata, West Bengal-700001 [PAN: AAHCA2395L] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Miraj D Shah, AR Respondent by : Shri Ambrish Mishra, DR Date of hearing : 03.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 21.08.2026 O R D E R PER GOPALAN GURUSAMY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 27.02.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2019-20.

2.

There is a delay of 27 days in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee filed Affidavit in support of condonation of delay in filing the Appeal. Considering the reasons given in the Affidavit, the delay is condoned.

ITA No.1972/KOL/2026 Aashkiran Commodities Private Limited; A.Y: 2019-20 3. Brief facts of the case are that, Assessee is a company filed its return of income for the year 2019-20. Based on the information flagged under the Risk Management Strategy, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. The gist of the information was that the Assessee had transaction with M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited without actual supply of goods to the tune of Rs.32,03,402/-. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessee was called upon to substantiate its transactions with M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited. The Assessing Officer noted that the Assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the transactions with M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited. The Assessing Officer also noted that as per credible information, and investigation by the Income Tax Department, certain entities including M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited were found to have issued bills without actual supply of goods and also have claimed bogus GST input credit. During the course of investigation Shri Virendra Dhannani, Director of the above companies deposed that the Assessee was one of the beneficiaries of the transactions with M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited. The Assessing Officer also noted that the status of the M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited is shown as “strike off” as at 31.03.2017 as per MCA portal. The Assessing Officer also made reference to the Verification Unit and which, in turn, reported that the entity (Alegra Traders Private Limtied) could not be

ITA No.1972/KOL/2026 Aashkiran Commodities Private Limited; A.Y: 2019-20 located at the given address indicating that the said company is non-existent. Based on this, the Assessing Officer had issued show cause notice for which the Assessee failed to give proper explanation to prove genuineness of the transaction made with M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited and therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition to the tune of Rs.32,03,402/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act and also added an amount of Rs.48,051/- being 1.5% of the above amount towards commission earned on such bogus transaction.

4.

Aggrieved, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) raising various grounds. The Ld. CIT(A) had given opportunity to the assessee to submit explanation and evidence in respect of the grounds raised. However, the assessee failed to avail such opportunities and as a result, the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the Appeal.

5.

Before us, the Ld. AR argued that the Assessing Officer had relied on the statement of one Shri Virendra Dhannani purportedly stating that the assessee was one of the beneficiaries of the entity M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited which had issued bills without actual supply of goods. But the assessee was not provided with the opportunity to examine the said Shri Virendra Dhannani. It was represented that the assessee had filed submissions before the Assessing Officer stating that Shri Virendra Dhannani is not a Director of Alegra Traders Private Limited as per data available in the Page | 3

ITA No.1972/KOL/2026 Aashkiran Commodities Private Limited; A.Y: 2019-20 portal of the Ministry of Companies Affairs, and therefore, the statement of the Shri Virendra Dhannani would not be relevant in regard to the purchase made from M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited. It was also represented that the Assessee had submitted the relevant documents before the Assessing Officer to prove the genuineness of its transactions with M/s Alegra Traders Private Limited. The AR further relied on the Judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Gee Bee Nirman Co Private Limited Vs ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata & Ors. dated 02.01.2024 in M.A.T 1667 of 2023 with I.A No. CAN 1 of 2023 and argued that the assessee may be provided an opportunity to cross-examine the said Virendra Dhannani, and requested that the matter may be remitted to the Assessing Officer.

6.

On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A).

7.

We have considered the rival submissions. We note that the appellant in the paper book filed before us, has enclosed a copy of the submission made before the ITO vide letter dated 13.04.2023, wherein at page 6 of the said letter, it was stated that as per data in the MCA website, Virendra Dhannani did not figure as director of M/s Alegra Traders Pvt Ltd. We find that this claim was not countered in the impugned assessment order. However, the statement of Virendra Dhanani has been relied upon in the impugned assessment without Page | 4

ITA No.1972/KOL/2026 Aashkiran Commodities Private Limited; A.Y: 2019-20 affording opportunity of cross-examination to the assessee. The plea for cross examination was also raised before the Ld. CIT(A). In the circumstances, the impugned assessment is set aside to the file of Assessing officer with a direction to afford the assessee opportunity to cross examine the said Virendra Dhannani and thereafter conclude the assessment following the principles of natural justice.

8.

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 20.08.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) (GOPALAN GURUSAMY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 20.08.2026 DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY// (MANISH BHOI) DEPUTY REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →