NABANITA MEDHI,GOALPARA vs. ITO, WARD GOALPARA, GOALPARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 163/GTY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 May 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to provide necessary supporting documents to the lower authorities and did not comply effectively with the CIT(A). Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file a return of income for AY 2017-18. Information received by the AO indicated substantial financial transactions. Proceedings under Section 147 were initiated, and the AO rejected the assessee's books of account under Section 145(3) due to lack of supporting documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the estimation of profit by the AO was arbitrary and whether the notice under Section 148 was barred by limitation, with the assessee seeking an opportunity to furnish supporting documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139,Section 147,Section 148A,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 143(2),Section 145(3),Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, – GUWAHATI BENCH

Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL – GUWAHATI BENCH VIRTUAL BENCH AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member ITA No.163/GTY/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nabanita Medhi…………………………………………………..…..Appellant Kalitapara, Goalpara Town Assam-783101 [PAN: BKDPM6847B] vs. ITO, Ward, Goalpara…………..……...……………………………..Respondent Assam-783101 Appearances by: Shri Nitin Sharma, FCA, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 14, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : May 18, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee did not file a return of income u/s 139 of the Act for the assessment year 2017-18. Information was received through the Compliance Management Strategy (CMS) of CBDT by the Assessing Officer indicating that there were substantial financial transactions in the case of the assessee. The information revealed total credits, including cash deposits in the current account maintained with Assam Gramin Vikash Bank, Goalpara, amounting to Rs.2,52,35,581/- and TDS u/s 194C from M/s Goldcrest Services Private Limited, amounting to Rs.1,690/-, aggregating total receipts of Rs.2,52,87,271/-. Based on the aforesaid information, proceedings u/s 147 of the Act were initiated after passing an order u/s 148A(b) of the Act and obtaining necessary approval from the competent authority. Thereafter, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. In response thereto, the assessee filed a return of income declaring total income of Rs.3,23,740/-. Subsequently, notices u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act were issued and complied with by the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished copies of the ITR acknowledgment, computation of income, cash book, final accounts, bank account statement, and copy of the agreement. Thereafter, further notices u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued requiring the assessee to furnish the purchase register, complete details of creditors and debtors, month-wise sales details, and copy of the commission account. In response thereto, the assessee furnished certain details including the purchase and sales register and bank statement; however, according to the Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to furnish proper supporting documents relating to the business activities. Proper purchase vouchers in support of the expenses claimed and a detailed commission account were not furnished, and only a simple statement of commission details was submitted. Therefore, the Assessing Officer observed that the expenses claimed by the assessee were not fully verifiable and accordingly rejected the books of account u/s 145(3) of the Act. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer estimated the profit @ 3% on the total turnover of Rs.5,21,68,842/-, which worked out to Rs.15,65,065/-, and completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, determining the total income at Rs.15,65,065/- after making an addition of Rs.12,41,365/- over and above the income already declared by the assessee.

3.

Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A); however, according to the records, despite issuance of notices, no effective compliance was made before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the order passed by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Still aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that estimation of profit @ 3% on the total turnover is highly excessive and arbitrary. It was further contended that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act was barred by limitation. However, it was submitted that due to non- availability of proper supporting documents before the authorities below, the assessee could not effectively substantiate the claim. Therefore, one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to furnish all supporting documents before the Assessing Officer. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 6. We, after hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record. We find that the assessee could not furnish all necessary supporting documents before the authorities below for proper verification of the claim. We further notice that even before the Ld. CIT(A), effective compliance was not made by the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it proper to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to examine the issue afresh in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all supporting documents and cooperate in the assessment proceedings without any fail. 7. In terms of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 18th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 18.05.2026. DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

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

More judgments on Section 139

All 3,629 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →