ANIL KUMAR TODI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 29,, KOLKATA

ITSSA 21/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2026AY 2016-20173 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the assessee's conduct was contemptuous and unpardonable due to persistent non-cooperation and dilatory tactics. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had been given substantial opportunities by both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) but failed to cooperate or present any facts or evidence. The assessee also failed to present any facts or point out errors before the Tribunal. Consequently, the ITAT found no error in the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). The appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed, and the orders of the lower authorities were upheld. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Anil Kumar Todi, filed six appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Kolkata, challenging the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21 (CIT(A)) for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18. These appeals were consequential to survey and search proceedings. The assessee was represented by no one before the ITAT, while the revenue was represented by Shri V. Vidhyadhar, CIT-DR. The revenue contended that the assessee was non-cooperative throughout the assessment and appellate proceedings. The ITAT noted that the assessee had appeared before the Assessing Officer but did not cooperate. Multiple opportunities were given by the CIT(A), but the assessee resorted to adjournments and filing additional grounds without making submissions. The assessee also refused to cooperate before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should dismiss the appeals due to the assessee's non-cooperation and dilatory tactics, despite the assessee challenging the legal issues and the ex parte orders of the CIT(A)? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the conduct of proceedings and the validity of ex parte orders). Assessee's contentions: Not recorded as the assessee was unrepresented. Revenue's contentions: The assessee has been non-cooperative before the Assessing Officer, the CIT(A), and the Tribunal. The assessee has used dilatory tactics to avoid representation and has not produced any evidence or pointed out any error in the orders of the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar, CIT-DR

Hearing: 20.05.2026Pronounced: 20.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS) A Nos.17 to 22/Kol/2026 Assessment Years: 2012-13 to 2017-18

Anil Kumar Todi ACIT, Circle-29, Kolkata

2, Queens Park, Ballygunge, Vs Kolkata-700019

(PAN: ADNPT 7835 Q) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri V. Vidhyadhar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 20.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 20.05.2026

ORDER Per George Mathan, JM: This is a batch of six appeals filed by the same assessee against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) in appeal Nos. CIT(A), Kolkata-8/10391/2019-20, CIT(A), Kolkata-8/10396/2019-20, CIT(A), Kolkata-8/10398/2019-20, CIT(A), Kolkata-8/10399/2019-20, CIT(A), Kolkata-8/10400/2019-20, CIT(A), Kolkata-8/10408/2019-20 all dated 28.02.2025 for the Assessment Years 2012-13 to 2017-18 respectively. Since issues are involved in all the appeals are identical, therefore, these have been heard together and are being disposed of by the common order.

I.T.(SS) A. Nos. 17 to 22/Kol/2026 2 Anil Kumar Todi. ; AY: 2012 -13 to 2017-18 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri V. Vidhyadhar, CIT-DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted by the ld. CIT-DR that the assessee is a non- cooperative even before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) and also the Tribunal.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order shows that these assessments are consequential of survey and subsequently a search. It is noticed that the assessee had appeared before the Assessing Officer but has not cooperated in the assessment proceedings. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that multiple opportunities have been given. First notice was requested for adjournment and 5th notice was responded with an application of additional grounds. Subsequently, there was no response. In response to the last notice, additional grounds have been filed but no submission was filed. A perusal of the grounds raised before the ld. CIT(A) shows that it was claimed that the Assessing Officer did not make further enquiry. The fact remains that there was refusal of cooperation even before the Tribunal. The assessee has challenged the legal issues and the ex parte order of the ld. CIT(A). Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer has given substantial number of opportunities to the assessee and the assessee is using dilatory tactics to avoid representation. It is nothing but contemptuous conduct on the part of

I.T.(SS) A. Nos. 17 to 22/Kol/2026 3 Anil Kumar Todi. ; AY: 2012 -13 to 2017-18 the assessee and the same is unpardonable. This being so, as it is noticed that the assessee has not produced any evidence before the Assessing Officer nor before the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee has not been representing before the lower authorities and has neither presented any facts before the Tribunal and no error in the order of the Assessing Officer and that of ld. CIT(A) has been pointed out by the assessee, the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed and we do so and the order of the lower authorities are upheld.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed.

Kolkata, the 20th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [George Mathan] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 20.05.2026. RS 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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →