MR. UTTAM KUMAR MONDAL,ASANSOL vs. I.T.O., TDS WARD - 4(3), ASANSOL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1448/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 July 2026AY 2016-20174 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee to substantiate their claim by producing Form 27C and reconciling the same. The Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue afresh after providing an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

A survey revealed the assessee failed to file TCS returns and furnish declarations under Section 206C. The assessee admitted to not collecting TCS or Form 27C. Proceedings were initiated, and additions were made for multiple assessment years.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee can substantiate their claim of collecting Form 27C from buyers, and if so, whether the additions made are justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 206C,Section 234E

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Respondent: Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury, Sr. DR
Hearing: 21.07.2026Pronounced: 29.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1445 to 1448/KOL/2026 Assessment Year:2013-14 to 2016-17

Uttam Kumar Mondal Vs. ITO, TDS Ward-4(3), Sumath Pally, S.B. Gorai Road, Asansol, Kolkata Asansol, West Bengal-713301 [PAN: ADZPM7775Q] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 21.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 29.07.2026 O R D E R PER BENCH: The above captioned Appealsare filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 26.02.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Years2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 respectively. 2. None appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Considering the issues involved in the present appeals, we find it appropriate to decide the appeals after hearing the Ld. DR. Since all four appeals involve similar issues for adjudication, the captioned Appeals are heard together and are being disposed off by this common order.

ITA No.1445 to 1448/KOL/2026 Uttam Kumar Mondal;A.Ys: 2013-14 to 2016-17 3. Brief facts of the case are that, a survey was conducted at the premises of the Assessee for the verification of TDS/TCS compliances. In the verification, it is found that the Assessee has neither filed TCS return in Form No.27EQ u/s 206C of the Act r.w.s. 31AA of the Income Tax Rule, 1962 with effect from 01.07.2012 till the date of survey nor has furnished any declaration in Form 27C u/s 206C(1A) r.w.s. 37C of the Act. The Assessee also in his statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act admitted that he neither collected TCS from any party or nor collected Form 27C for non-collection of TCS. Therefore, proceedings u/s 206C(6A) r.w.s. 206C(6) and 206C(7) and 234E (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4) were initiated by the Assessing Officer. For the three quarters in respect of A.Y.s 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 and assessment order came to be passed by treating Assessee in default by making the addition for each year.

4.

Aggrieved by the Assessment orders dated 09.02.2018, Assessee preferred four Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 26.02.2026, dismissed the Appeals of the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Assessee preferred the captioned Appeals.

5.

The Assessee in his Ground No.3 contended that Assessee has collected Form 27C from the buyers on different dates and filed the same before the Ld. CIT(A) and the copy of the Form No.27C is in the hands of the Assessee can be produced any time. Page | 2

ITA No.1445 to 1448/KOL/2026 Uttam Kumar Mondal;A.Ys: 2013-14 to 2016-17 6. The Ld. DR relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities, sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

7.

We have heard the parties and perused the material on record. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the Appeal on the ground that Assessee could not substantiate any documentary evidence during the assessment proceedings. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to Assessee to substantiate his claim by producing Form 27C collected from the buyer and reconcile before the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. The Assessee shall be provided with opportunity of being heard.

8.

In the result, all four Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 29.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.07.2026 DP, PS

ITA No.1445 to 1448/KOL/2026 Uttam Kumar Mondal;A.Ys: 2013-14 to 2016-17 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY//

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 206C

All 269 judgments and leading authorities on Section 206C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →