CALCUTTA AHMEDABAD CARRIERS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 13(1), , KOLKATA

Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.11.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, for the assessment year 2013-14, as per the information available with the department, it was noticed that assessee made cash deposit in bank accounts amounting to Rs.22,46,500/-, interest income received u/s 194A of the Act of Rs.1,44,254/- and assessee has shown turn over in service tax return of Rs.1,92,36,368/- but did not file return of income for the assessment year in question. Accordingly, case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act, followed by the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act but assessee did not

I.T.A. No.3043/Kol/2025 Calcutta Ahmedabad Carriers Private Limited ; AY: 2013-14 file any return of income in pursuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. Thereafter, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee but assessee has failed to substantiate its claim before the Assessing Officer. Ultimately, the Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice where partial compliance was made by the assessee stating that assessee has gone for Income Tax disclosed under IDS but supported documents could not be furnished, therefore, the Ld. Assessing Officer assessed the income of the assessee by making certain additions and assessed the income at Rs.40,09,160/-. 3. Aggrieved by the above order, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) where the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by sustaining the order of the Assessing Officer due to non-compliance before him. 4. Still aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal, challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) stating that the impugned order passed is bad in law and liable to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the decision of the authorities below. 6. We after hearing the matter find that it was in the issue of availing benefits of IDS but while passing the impugned order, the Ld. CIT(A) did not consider the income declared under IDS scheme which prejudice to the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we remand back the whole issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to submit the supported documents before the Ld. CIT(A) in order to substantiate its claim.

I.T.A. No.3043/Kol/2025 Calcutta Ahmedabad Carriers Private Limited ; AY: 2013-14 7. In terms of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 16th April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member

Dated: 16.04.2026. 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