DHRUBAJYOTI BORGOHAIN,ASSAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI

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.149/GTY/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dhrubajyoti Borgohain………………………………….……………Appellant House No.32, Jyotipath, Janakpur Chariali, Kahilipara, Guwahati Assam-781019 [PAN:ACLPB5177A] vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Guwahati…………..……...…..……………Respondent Assam-781005 Appearances by: None, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 12, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : May 14, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.12.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [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 is an individual engaged in the business of civil construction and hired vehicles in the name and style of M/s Dhruba Jyoti Borgohain. The assessee filed his return for the assessment year 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs.1,14,83,620/-. In the case of the assessee, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted. During the course of the search and seizure operation, documents marked as DJB-01 to DJB-04 and digital evidence marked as DJB/HD/05 were found and seized. Further, a search was also conducted at the bank locker of the assessee

ITA No.149/GTY/2026 Dhrubajyoti Borgohain; A.Y: 2017-18 where jewellery amounting to Rs.31,76,691/- was found. Subsequently, proceedings u/s 147 of the Act were initiated and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. In response thereto, the assessee filed a return of income declaring the same income of Rs.1,14,83,620/-. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) was issued followed by notice u/s 142(1), wherein the assessee was required to explain the cash transactions reflected in the seized documents amounting to Rs.3,30,47,584/- and to clarify whether the same were recorded in the books of account maintained for the assessment year 2017-18. In response, the assessee submitted that the amounts were already reflected in the declared turnover and audited financial statements. It was further explained that certain entries represented cash withdrawals from bank contra entries, duplication of entries amounting to Rs.27,00,000/-, expenses amounting to Rs.39,55,981/-, and capital introduced by the proprietor amounting to Rs.1,22,97,874/-, and that Rs.1,29,93,729/- was already declared in the turnover in the audited balance sheet. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the submissions of the assessee and observed that although amounts of Rs.2,85,31,748/- were recorded in the books of account, the balance amount of Rs.45,15,836/- remained unexplained. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.45,15,836/- under various sections of the Act. 3. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A); however, the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the additions made by the Assessing Officer without properly considering the detailed submissions and contentions raised by the assessee. 4. Still aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, we noticed that there was a delay of 20 days in filing the present appeal. In this connection, the assessee filed

ITA No.149/GTY/2026 Dhrubajyoti Borgohain; A.Y: 2017-18 a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents of the petition and being satisfied with the reasons stated therein, the delay of 20 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. However, we noticed that at the time of hearing, an adjournment application was filed by the assessee seeking adjournment. However, considering that the issues involved are small and relate to factual verification of the documents and evidence, therefore, we proceeded to hear the matter with the assistance of the Ld. DR. In this connection, the assessee filed detailed submissions stating that detailed submissions were made before the authorities below, however, those were not properly considered while framing the assessment order as well as while disposing of the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A). The extract of the said written submission is as under: -

ITA No.149/GTY/2026 Dhrubajyoti Borgohain; A.Y: 2017-18

5.

ITA No.149/GTY/2026 Dhrubajyoti Borgohain; A.Y: 2017-18

ITA No.149/GTY/2026 Dhrubajyoti Borgohain; A.Y: 2017-18 5. We, after considering the rival submissions of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we are of the view that the issues involved in the present appeal require fresh examination at the level of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we restore the matter to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer for fresh examination in accordance with law, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all supporting documents and evidence in support of the claim without any default. 6. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 14th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 14.05.2026. 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