VEERPRABHU COMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC 2(4), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITSSA 51/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 April 2026AY 2014-20155 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal for want of prosecution due to non-compliance, and this order was not on merit. The Tribunal considered the assessee's contention that the appeal should be restored to the AO to determine whether the amount of Rs. 18,69,28,400/- was received during the year under appeal or in the preceding financial year. In the interest of justice, and considering the submissions, the Tribunal remitted the appeal of the assessee back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration. The AO was directed to afford an opportunity to the assessee to be heard. The orders passed by the lower authorities were set aside. The Tribunal did not decide the merits of the addition but focused on procedural fairness and the opportunity for the assessee to present its case regarding the timing of the receipt of funds. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Trimudra Credit Limited, is appealing an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2012-13. The original assessment, completed under Section 143(3), determined the total income at Rs. 18,74,16,960/-, a significant increase from the declared Rs. 2,46,957/-. This was due to a 'large share premium received'. The CIT(A) initially deleted the addition, but the ITAT Kolkata remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh consideration, conditional on the assessee providing supporting documentation. The assessee failed to comply with subsequent notices from the AO. Consequently, the AO added back the entire amount received on issue of shares, passing an order under Section 254/263/147/143(3) on 30.12.2019. The assessee's subsequent appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-appearance.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should remit the appeal back to the AO for fresh consideration, directing the AO to pass a fresh order after hearing the assessee, considering the submission that the total share capital and premium added back was not received during the year under appeal but in the preceding financial year. Assessee's Contention: The Learned AR argued that the appeal should be remitted back to the AO for fresh consideration, as the AO did not consider the case in the true perspective. The AR specifically requested that the AO be directed to pass a fresh order after hearing the assessee, emphasizing that the amounts added back were received in the preceding financial year, a fact not considered by the AO. The AR submitted that since the matter requires fresh adjudication on an accounting basis, the appeal should be restored to the AO, not the CIT(A), even though the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte. Revenue's Contention: The Learned DR supported the impugned order, stating that the assessee did not cooperate in the proceedings before the AO or the CIT(A), despite the ITAT's remand order being conditional on the assessee's compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 254,Section 142(1),Section 263,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: ShriRajesh Kumar & ShriPradip Kumar Choubey

IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA Before ShriRajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and ShriPradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No.2680/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Trimudra Credit Limited……………………………….………………………….Appellant 8, Lyons Range, Kolkata- 700001 [PAN No. AABCT0282B] Vs. ITO, Ward 4(1)……………………..…………….………... Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee, 700069 Appearances by: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR ,appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT(DR),appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : April 16, 2026 Date of pronouncing theorder : April 28 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.07.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) passed under Section 143(3)r.w.s254 of the Assessment Year 2012-13 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. The appellant is an individual assessee. The appellant filed his return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 declaring total income at Rs.2.46,957/-. The case was selected for Scrutiny assessment through Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection (CASS) with the reason "large share premium received. Accordingly, assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) on 09.03.2015, determining total income to Rs. 18,74,16,960/- Being aggrieved with the order, appellant filed appeal before CIT(A) and the CIT(A)-2, Kolkata deleted the entire addition vide order dated 30.06.2015. The Department filed appeal to Hon'ble ITAT. Kolkata against the order of Ld.CIT(A). The Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata vide its order dated 11.01.2019, has remand the

ITA No.2680/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2012-13 matter to AO for fresh consideration only on condition that the appellant shall comply on support of its claim. Accordingly, notices u/s 142(1) were issued to appellant requiring him to furnish the requisite details but, the appellant failed to comply with the notices and did not file any response. In the absence of documentary evidence of primary source of its capital raised, the entire amount of money received on account of issue of shares along with the quantum paid for issue of shares was added back to the income in the assessment order u/s. 254/263/147/143(3) of the Act passed by the AO on 30.12.2019.

Aggrieved by the said assessee preferred appeal wherein appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on account of non-appearance to the notice issued.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied the assessee preferred appeal before us.

3.

The Ld. AR instead of arguing the of the case has only prayed that appeal of the assessee be remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration as the AO did not consider the case of the assessee in true perspective. The Ld. AR submits that Ld. AO be directed to pass fresh order after hearing the assessee as out of the total share capital and premium considered for addition was not received during the year under appeal. The submission of the AR is that the amounts were received in the preceding financial year and this fact is not been considered by the AO. The Ld. AR submits that since the matter requires for fresh adjudication on accounting basis hence appeal of the assessee be restored to the file of the AO not to the CIT(A) though the order passed by the CIT(A) is an ex-party order.

4.

The Ld. DR by supporting the impugned order has submitted that the assessee did not cooperate in the proceedings before the AO nor before the CIT(A) though Hon’ble ITAT Kolkata has remanded the matter to AO for fresh consideration only on condition that assessee shall comply in support of his claim. 2

ITA No.2680/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2012-13 5. Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties and on perusal of the impugned order we find that CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution as there were non-compliance on behalf of the assessee. The order passed by the CIT(A) is not on merit rather he dismissed the appeal in limine. The contention of the AR is that appeal of the assessee be restored to the file of the AO to consider that whether the amount received of Rs. 18,69,28,400during the year under appeal or the same was received in the preceding financial year. Going over the facts of the case,considering the submission and for the interest of justice we remitted the appeal of the assessee to the file of the AO for fresh consideration in the light of the submission of the AR as discussed above. The order passed by the Lower Authority are hereby set aside. The appeal is remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration by affording an opportunity to the assessee to hear.

As a result, the appeal of the assessee has been allowed for the statistical purpose.

Kolkata, the 28th

March, 2026.

ITA No.2680/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2012-13 Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated:.28. 04.2026. DC, 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

ITA No.2680/Kol/2025 Assessment Year- 2012-13

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 →