MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 40(1),, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1942/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 April 2026AY 2012-20133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's lack of cooperation and granted one more opportunity. The appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee's representative raised an issue regarding reopening, but failed to substantiate it. The assessee had not cooperated with the Assessing Officer by not providing relevant details.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment was valid and whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity to present their case before the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Smt. Shreya Layolka, AR
For Respondent: Shri Aditya Bikram, Sr. DR
Hearing: 16.04.2026Pronounced: 16.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1942/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Manoj Kumar Gupta ITO, Ward-40(1), Kolkata Vs 18/19, Dr. Abani Dutta Road Salkia, Howrah, W.B 711106. (PAN: ACWPG5565G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Smt. Shreya Layolka, AR Revenue by : Shri Aditya Bikram, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 16.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 16.04.2026

ORDER Per George Mathan, JM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.CIT(A), Kolkata-12/10203/2019-20 dated 23.06.2025.

2.

Smt. Shreya Layolka, AR represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Aditya Bikram, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

At the time of hearing, the ld. AR has raised issue in regard to reopening, however, she has failed to substantiate the claim for reopening. The notice u/s 148 was issued on 29.03.2019, return was

ITA No.1942/Kol/2025 filed on 05.05.2019. The reasons for reopening was provided to the assessee on July 2019, the assessee objected to the reasons for reopening on 06.12.2019 whereas on 30.11.2019 the show-cause notice has been issued to the assessee and the assessment has been completed on 12.12.2019. The claim that the objection of the assessee has not been disposed off does not stand to reason as the assessment proceedings has already started and objection has been filed by the assessee at the fag end just before the completion of the assessment. After going through the assessment order, it is noticed that the assessee has not cooperated in the assessment proceedings and has not provided relevant details before the Assessing Officer. Under the circumstances and considering the plea of the ld. AR, we grant one more opportunity to the assessee to file all relevant details by restoring the appeal to the file of the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer will re-adjudicate the issues on merits after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16/04/2026. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated:16/04/2026 RS

ITA No.1942/Kol/2025

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 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →