SWADHIN SAHOO,SIMILIA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 144/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 April 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while noting the assessee's failure to provide supporting documents, granted one final opportunity on principles of natural justice. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's income was initially assessed at Rs. 22,54,040/-. Following a revision order under Section 263, a fresh assessment was made with additions of Rs. 83,15,000/- for excess purchases and Rs. 49,24,603/- for understated goods value, leading to a total income of Rs. 1,54,93,643/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied adequate opportunity to present their case and whether a fresh opportunity should be granted to substantiate claims with supporting evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, – CUTTACK BENCH

Before: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL – CUTTACK BENCH VIRTUAL BENCH AT KOLKATA Before Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member and Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member ITA No.144/CTK/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Swadhin Sahoo……………………………………………….………...Appellant Similia, Kankadapal, Dhenkanal Odisha-759013 [PAN: ASOPS7244Q] vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar……………………..……...…..…..Respondent Odisha-751010 Appearances by: Shri Diganta Das appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Umakanta Dhrupati, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : April 15, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : April 16, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: 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.NFAC/2016-17/10259414 dated 09.01.2026 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 declaring income of Rs.22,54,040/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed by determining the total income at Rs.22,64,580/-. Subsequently, the Ld. PCIT, Bhubaneswar invoke provisions of section 263 of the Act, holding that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and directed Assessing Officer

ITA No.144/CTK/2026 Swadhin Sahoo to pass a fresh assessment order. In pursuant to the direction of the Ld. PCIT, Bhubaneswar, the Assessing Officer pass a fresh order making the addition of Rs.83,15,000/- on account of excess purchases and Rs.49,24,603/- on account of understated value of goods reflected in profit and loss account. Accordingly, total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.1,54,93,643/-.

3.

Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, assessee failed to furnish supporting documents and did not effectively substantiate the claim during the appellate proceedings. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and sustained the addition observing that assessee failed to discharge the onus of proof.

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 orders of the lower authorities are bad in law, as adequate opportunity was not effectively availed by the assessee and one more opportunity may be granted to substantiate the claim with supporting evidence.

5.

On the other hand, Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee fails to properly appear and furnish evidence during the assessment as well as appellate proceedings. Therefore, the additions were rightly made and sustained.

6.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record, it is observed that assessee did not properly comply with the proceedings before the Assessing Officer, as well as before the Ld. CIT(A) and fail to furnish necessary supporting documents to substantiate the claim. However, considering the principles of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be granted one final

ITA No.144/CTK/2026 Swadhin Sahoo opportunity to present the case on merit. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merit in accordance with law by providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate and furnish all necessary supported documents without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

7.

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

Kolkata, the 16th April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Laxmi Prasad Sahu] [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 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →