GHOSH BROTHERS ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE - 1, GUWAHATI, 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. 91 /GTY/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited.………………….………...Appellant Adjacent to DTO Office, NH 37, Betkuchi, Guwahati, Assam-781034 [PAN: AABCG7254Q] vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Guwahati…..………………..……...…..………………..Respondent Assam-781005 ITA No. 92 /GTY/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited.………………….………...Appellant Adjacent to DTO Office, NH 37, Betkuchi, Guwahati, Assam-781034 [PAN: AADCG7819B] vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Guwahati…..………………..……...…………….....…..Respondent Assam-781005 Appearances by: Shri Ramesh Goenka, AR, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 06, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : May 19, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: These two appeals have been filed by the two different assessee against the separate orders passed by the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] dated 31.03.2025 and 13.02.2025, for the assessment year 2012-13, passed u/s 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’], arising out of the separate assessment orders framed u/s 144 of the Act, both dated 27.03.2015.

ITA Nos.91 & 92/GTY/2025 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited & Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited Since common issues are involved in both the appeals, except variation in figures and names of the assessee, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. For the purpose of adjudication, we first take up ITA No.91/GTY/2026, and our findings therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to ITA No.92/GTY/2026. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 declaring total income of Rs.53,42,320/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment. During the course of assessment proceedings, notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued, calling for various supporting documents. However, according to the Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to properly comply with the statutory notices and did not furnish complete details as called for. Accordingly, during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the Act vide order dated 27.03.2015, on the basis of material available on record, and made various additions and disallowances while determining the income of the assessee at Rs.9,00,56,670/-. 3. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A), after considering the facts available on record and observing that adequate compliance was not made by the assessee even during the appellate proceedings, dismissed the appeal and sustained the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR

ITA Nos.91 & 92/GTY/2025 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited & Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited submitted that the assessment order was passed ex parte u/s 144 of the Act, without proper examination of the relevant material and supporting evidence. It was submitted that, due to unavoidable circumstances and lack of proper representation before the lower authorities, the assessee could not effectively place all relevant records before the Assessing Officer as well as before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR further stated that the assessee is now ready and willing to furnish all relevant documents and explanation before the Assessing Officer if one more opportunity is granted in the interest of justice. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the order of the authorities below and submitted that despite repeated opportunity, assessee failed to comply with the notices issued during the assessment proceedings and, therefore, the Assessing Officer had no option but to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the Act. 6. We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record. From the record, it is evident that the assessment in the present case of the assessee was completed u/s 144 of the Act due to non-compliance on the part of the assessee. It also appears that, even during the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), the matter was not properly represented and necessary evidence was not effectively placed before the appellate authority. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that substantial justice should prevail over technicalities, and the assessee should be granted one more opportunity to substantiate its claim by producing relevant documents and placing supporting evidence before the Assessing Officer. We further observe that the issues involved in the appeal require proper factual verification and examination of the documentary evidence, which could not be adequately carried out due to lack of proper compliance before the lower authorities.

ITA Nos.91 & 92/GTY/2025 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited & Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings and furnish all necessary documents, books of account, bank statements, and other evidence, as may be required by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and, thereafter, pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.91/GTY/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. Since the issues involved in ITA No.92/GTY/2025 are identical and similar to those adjudicated in ITA No.91/GTY/2025, our findings and directions rendered therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to this appeal also. Accordingly, this appeal is also restored 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. Thus, ITA No.92/GTY/2025 is also allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, both the ITA Nos.91/GTY/2025 & 92/GTY/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 19th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 19.05.2026. DP, PS

ITA Nos.91 & 92/GTY/2025 Ghosh Brothers Electronics Private Limited & Ghosh Brothers Auto Sales Private Limited 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