RAKESH MONDAL,HOWRAH, KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD 47(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3287/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 June 2026AY 2022-20235 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal without going into the merits of the case and that the assessee was unable to file some evidence. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh decision, providing one more opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a goldsmith, sold gold in the form of deposits for Rs. 15,06,600/-. The Assessing Officer added this amount under Section 69A as unexplained money due to the assessee's non-compliance with notices. The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 143(2),Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)

ITA No. 3287/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2022-2023) Rakesh Mondal IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 3287/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-2023 Rakesh Mondal,………………………..……….…Appellant Antilapara, Anantapur, Shaympur P.S., Howrah-711301 [PAN:BEGPM9821L] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………..…..Respondent Ward-47(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), BBD Bagh, Kolkata-700001 Appearances by: Shri Anoop Francis, A.R., appeared on behalf of the assessee Ms. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: June 08, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order: June 22, 2026 O R D E R

The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 08.10.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2022-2023.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is Bengali Goldsmith and engaged in the business of manufacturing of gold

ITA No. 3287/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2022-2023) Rakesh Mondal ornaments for the Peeyar Group of Jewellers, Thrissur. The assessee filed its return of income on 28.12.2022 declaring income of Rs.3,13,090/-. Based on investigation concluded by the Office of ld. Pr. DIT (Investigation), Kochi with regard to the unaccounted deposits and based on seized material, it was noticed that the Goldsmiths, who work for Peeyar Group, used 1 + 13 modus operandi which relates to the making charges paid to the Goldsmith wherein 1 touch gold and Rs. 13 is paid to the Goldsmith. It is noted that making charges are partially paid in cash and partially paid via wastage in gold in the form of security deposits. The assessee has sold the gold in the form of deposits to Peeyar Group in cash for a sum of Rs.15,06,600/-. The case was selected for scrutiny proceedings under CASS by issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act on 01.06.2023. The assessee did not make any compliance. Subsequently a show cause notice under section 144 of the Income Tax Act dated 15.12.2023 was issued to the assessee, but no reply was made. As the assessee did not make any reply in response to the notices issued, the ld. Assessing Officer added Rs.15,06,600/- under section 69A as unexplained money and added to the total income of assessee. Finally, ld. Assessing Officer assessed the total income of assessee at Rs.18,19,690/- under section 144/143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).

3.

The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex- parte by upholding the order of ld. Assessing Officer. Even the assessee did not make any compliance in response to the notices

ITA No. 3287/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2022-2023) Rakesh Mondal issued from time to time. The ld. CIT(Appeals) was of the view that the assessee has not been able to show that the conclusion drawn by the ld. Assessing Officer was incorrect in any manner. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

At the time of hearing, it was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that ld. CIT(Appeals) just simply upholding the order of ld. Assessing Officer dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without going into merit of the case. He prayed before the Bench to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and also prayed to give one opportunity to substantiate his case.

5.

On the other hand, it was the submission of the ld. Departmental Representative that the assessee failed to offer any explanation/supporting documents in respect of the grounds of appeal raised by him before the ld. Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. D.R. pleaded that inspite of sufficient opportunities provided to substantiate his case, the assessee did not produce any supporting documents in support of his claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).

6.

I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The assessee did not furnish any documentary evidence in support of his claim before the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(Appeals) just simply upholding the order of ld. Assessing Officer dismissed the appeal of the assessee without

ITA No. 3287/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2022-2023) Rakesh Mondal going into merit of the case. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the assessee was not in a position to file some of the evidences before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, I am of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) to decide the issues afresh. Therefore, I remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) by producing proper books of accounts and other additional evidences in support of his claim, failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits of the case, based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/06/2026.

Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 22nd day of June, 2026

ITA No. 3287/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2022-2023) Rakesh Mondal

Copies to :(1) Rakesh Mondal, Antilapara, Anantapur, Shaympur P.S., Howrah-711301 (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-47(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), BBD Bagh, Kolkata-700001 (3) CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi; (4) CIT - , Kolkata; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order

Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →