SANDIP PAUL,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 22(2), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 448/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 May 2026AY 2017-20183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the interest of justice, the issues were restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication with an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 4 days due to kidney ailments. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 12,72,205/- for unexplained cash credits in the bank account as the assessee failed to provide proper explanation.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition for unexplained cash credits is justified without providing the assessee with adequate opportunity to explain. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA

Hearing: 04/05/2026Pronounced: 04/05/2026

आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, JM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, JODHPUR [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.CIT(A), Kolkata-6/10402/2019-20 dated 10.11.2025. 2. Shri Rajesh Kr. Mishra, Advocate represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Manas Mondal, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

The appeal is filed by the assessee with a delay of 4 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay mentioning long-standing kidney ailments and stage of dialysis. The reasons given in the affidavit are plausible and reasonable for the said delay.

2 ITANo.448/Kol/2026 Consequently, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 4. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the assessee did not file relevant details for the cash deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee is engaged in the profession of tax consultant and he has made payment of taxes on behalf of his clients. The Assessing Officer has made an addition of Rs.12,72,205/- representing unexplained cash credits in the bank account of the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee has not able to give proper explanation before the Assessing Officer. The assessee has prayed that the issues in this appeal may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. In reply, the ld. DR did not raise any objection for restoration of the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer. 6. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the orders of the lower authorities shows that the assessee has not given proper explanation before the Assessing Officer. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

3 ITANo.448/Kol/2026 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04/05/2026.

Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 04/05/2026 RS आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.

सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,

(Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →