SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1),, KOLKATA

ITSSA 50/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 November 2025AY 2020-2111 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

A search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted on the assessee, Sanjay Kumar Gupta, on November 5, 2020. Notices under Section 153A were issued for six assessment years preceding the search, from AY 2015-16 to AY 2020-21. During the search, cash amounting to ₹1,35,29,300 was seized. No incriminating material was found. The assessee, engaged in transportation, filed returns for AY 2020-21 and AY 2021-22, declaring ₹48,41,969 and ₹91,63,502 respectively, totaling ₹1,40,05,471. The assessee requested appropriation of the seized cash against self-assessment tax for AY 2020-21 and AY 2022-23. As the cash was not appropriated, the assessee filed returns manually. The Assessing Officer (AO) rejected the manually filed returns as not maintainable, issued a notice under Section 142(1), and made an assessment under Section 144, treating the entire seized cash of ₹1,40,87,000 as unexplained money under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) affirmed this order.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition of ₹50,22,990 in AY 2021-22 was a double addition, as this income was already offered and accepted for AY 2020-21. Therefore, the AO was directed to exclude this amount, resulting in the income for AY 2021-22 being assessed at ₹90,64,010. Regarding the applicability of Section 115BBE, the Tribunal found that since the assessee explained the source of income as business earnings from transportation, the provisions of Section 69A were not applicable. Consequently, the higher tax rate under Section 115BBE was also held to be inapplicable. The Tribunal directed the AO to adjust the seized cash against the self-assessment tax liability, citing decisions in Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Narendra N. Thacker and Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Ashok Kumar. This adjustment was also held to be applicable for charging interest under Section 234B, meaning interest would be calculated after adjusting the seized cash. The appeal for AY 2020-21 was allowed mutatis mutandis to the decision for AY 2021-22.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition of ₹1,40,87,000 as unexplained money under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing Officer, which was affirmed by the CIT(A), is valid, considering that ₹50,22,990 of this amount was already disclosed and accepted for AY 2020-21? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the addition of ₹50,22,990 in AY 2021-22 constitutes double addition as it was already offered and accepted for AY 2020-21. Furthermore, the assessee contended that applying the 60% tax rate under Section 115BBE was illegal and void ab initio because the source of income (transportation business) was explained, making Section 69A and consequently Section 115BBE inapplicable. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the Assessing Officer and CIT(A), treated the entire seized cash as unexplained money and applied Section 115BBE. The judgment does not explicitly record separate arguments for the revenue on each specific point, but their stance is reflected in the AO's assessment order and the CIT(A)'s affirmation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153A,Section 143(3),Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 131,Section 132B,Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 234A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan &, Ms. Sonam Bajoria, ARs
For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Hearing: 13.08.2025Pronounced: 11.11.2025

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata-26 (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 11.03.2025 for the AY 2020-21 & 2021-22. 02. The facts in brief are that a search u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on the assessee on 05.11.2020. Accordingly, the notices were issued u/s 153A of the Act for the six assessment years prior to the year of search from A.Y. 2015-16 to A.Y. 2020-21. The assessee is engaged in the business of transportation business. The assessee has regularly ITA Nos. 50 &791/KOL/2025 Sanjay Kumar Gupta; A.Ys

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,286 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →