BRAJA KISHORE JENA,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(1), CUTTACK

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “HYBRID COURT AT CUTTACK” BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.545/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Braja Kishore Jena ITO, WARD-1(1), CUTTACK Vs Panaspur, Balichandrapur, Cuttack, Odisha-754205. (PAN: AGTPJ0322P) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri B. K. Mohapatra, AR Revenue by : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 27.05.2026

ORDER PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the NFAC, DELHI [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.CIT(A), Cuttack/10966/2019-20 dated 13.08.2025.

ITA No.545/CTK/25 licence for liquor business, the assessee had created the partnership firm and liquor business was done in the hands of the partnership firm. The income of the said liquor business was offered in the hands of the partnership firm. It was the submission that the TCS was also claimed in the hands of the partnership firm along with TDS. It was the submission that the assessee is also running transport business. The assessee has filed its return of income showing an income of Rs.6,60,000/- for the impugned assessment year. The return was taken up for processing and in the course of assessment, it was noticed that the assessee was having high value TCS payments made for purchase of liquor from the government agencies and as per the PAN, it was used to collect the TCS at a lower rate of 1%. Consequently, the Assessing Officer determined the total purchases of liquor at Rs.12,10,78,606/- and the total TCS was Rs.12,10,773/-. Form 26AS also clearly showed the said purchases and the TCS in the name of the assessee. It was the submission that the partnership firm which was doing its business of liquor had offered income from the said liquor business and the TCS was also claimed in the hands of the partnership firm. It was the submission that return filed by the partnership firm came to be processed and intimation came to be issued u/s 143(1) accepting the returned income. It was the submission that subsequently, in the course of assessment of the assessee-individual, the Assessing Officer has treated the entire business income of liquor transaction as income of the assessee and has estimated the income of the assessee at 8% of the turnover. It was the submission that as the income 2

ITA No.545/CTK/25 has already been offered in the hands of partnership firm, the income is not liable to be assessed in the hands of the assessee-individual as it would amount to double taxation. It was the submission that the addition as made by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. It was further submitted that if the said business income is to be assessed in the hands of the individual then the salary of the working-partners received by the assessee of Rs.36,000/- and the interest received by the assessee from the firm of Rs.3,48,000/- is liable to be deleted.

ITA No.545/CTK/25 now asking that the income be shifted from one hand to other, is not permissible. It was submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that the Tribunal cannot adjudicate on the facts of another entity without hearing such assessee or without the proceedings against such assessee being pending before the Tribunal. It was the submission that as it has been admitted by the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee that the licence is in the name of assessee, obviously the income from the activity of using such licence is to be assessed only in the hands of the assessee. It was further submitted that the TCS of Rs.12 lakhs has also been capitalized in the balance sheet of the assessee-individual. It was prayed that the order of the ld. CIT(A) and that of Assessing Officer should be upheld.

ITA No.545/CTK/25 of double taxation before the Assessing Officer even though there was adequate time for raising such issue when the assessment was going on. Before the ld. CIT(A) also, the assessee has been unable to dislodge the findings as made by the Assessing Officer and before the Tribunal also, the assessee has been unable to show any variation to the findings of the Assessing Officer, nor the assessee be able to point out any decision contrary to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Biharilal Jaiswal vs. CIT referred to supra. It is an admitted fact that the income is to be assessed in the right hands, however if the assessee has shown the income in the wrong hand, it is for the assessee to bring to the attention of the revenue or take appropriate steps for making such correction. This has also not been done by the assessee. This being so, we find no error in the order of the ld. CIT(A) and that of Assessing Officer which calls for any interference.

Cuttack, the 27th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [George Mathan] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/Judicial Member Dated: 27.05.2026. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5

ITA No.545/CTK/25

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar