JAY PRAKASH SINGH,C/O PRABHU SINGH KUTTI SIMARIA CHATRA vs. APPEAL COMMISSIONER, HAZIRABAGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 309/RAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi16 April 2026AY 2016-20173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim with supporting documents. A cost of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed on the assessee for non-cooperation.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exempt income of Rs. 79,82,866/- which comprised of agricultural income and profits from a partnership firm. The assessee failed to furnish supporting documents, leading the Assessing Officer to treat the entire amount as unexplained income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to furnish evidence for claimed exempt income despite previous non-compliance. The adequacy of the CIT(A)'s consideration of the assessee's submissions and evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(1),Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, – RANCHI BENCH

Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL – RANCHI BENCH VIRTUAL BENCH AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member ITA No.309/RAN/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jay Prakash Singh. …………………………..……………………………...Appellant C/o Prabhu Singh Kutti Simaria Chatra, Hazaribag, Jharkhand-825103 [PAN: BPBPS1002P] vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Hazaribag………….………………..……...…..…..Respondent Jharkhand-825301 Appearances by: Shri Mritunjay Kumar, AR, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : April 13, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : April 16, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.07.2025 of the NFAC, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’] passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.16,79,900/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee had claimed exempt income amounting to Rs.79,82,866/- comprising of Rs.8,19,000/- as agricultural income and Rs.71,63,866/- as thereof profits from partnership firm. However, assessee failed to furnish supporting documents evidence to substantiate the claim of such

ITA No.309/Ran/2025 Jay Prakash Singh exempt income. Consequently, the Assessing Officer treated the entire amount of Rs.79,82,866/- as unexplained income and added the same to the total income of the assessee. Accordingly, assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act, by determining total income at Rs.96,62,766/-.

3.

Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay on one month. The Ld. CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal by sustaining the order of the Assessing Officer.

4.

Still aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had not properly considered the submissions and evidences of the assessee. It was pleaded that the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

On the other hand, the Ld. DR opposed the prayer of the assessee contended that the assessee is a habitual defaulter, and had failed to produce supporting documents even during the earlier proceedings, therefore, no further opportunity may be granted.

6.

We have heard the rival submission and perused the material available on record, it is observed that assessee failed to comply with the notices issued during the assessment proceedings and did not furnish necessary documentary evidences to substantiate the claim of exempt income, even before the Ld. CIT(A) proper compliance was not made. However, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to substantiate its claim. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the issue afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

ITA No.309/Ran/2025 Jay Prakash Singh The assessee is also directed to produce all necessary supporting documents to substantiate its claim of exempt income. Considering the non-cooperative conduct of the assessee and repeated failure to comply with the statutory notices which resulted in delay in disposal of the case, we deem it fit to impose a cost of Rs.50,000/-. The assessee is directed to deposit the said amount with the Income Tax Department and furnish a proof of the payment before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law after considering the evidence produce by the assessee.

7.

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

Kolkata, the 16th April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Ratnesh Nandan Sahay] [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

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →