SANJAY RUNGTA,RANCHI vs. A.C.I.T., CC-3(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITSSA 34/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2025AY 2014-20153 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, upon hearing the submissions and perusing the orders of the lower authorities, noted that the assessment was made due to the assessee's non-compliance, and the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for similar reasons. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remit the appeals back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to cooperate in the proceedings. The orders passed by both the AO and the CIT(A) were set aside. The Tribunal explicitly stated that the appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, indicating that the substantive issues were not decided on merits at this stage.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sanjay Rungta, is part of the Rungta group, which was subjected to a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act. For Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13, the assessee filed a return of income declaring Rs. 11,12,410/-. Notices under Section 143(2) and questionnaires were issued. The assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) submitted a balance sheet but failed to comply with a notice under Section 142(1). Consequently, the Assessing Officer (AO) passed an assessment order determining the total income at Rs. 14,70,410/-. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who dismissed the appeal for want of response. The assessee then filed appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for AYs 2012-13, 2014-15, and 2015-16.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should restore the appeals to the file of the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee an opportunity to present all facts and documents, considering the procedural history of non-compliance and dismissal by lower authorities. Assessee's Contention: The assessee's AR argued that the appeals should be restored to the AO's file to allow the assessee an opportunity to present their case and documents, emphasizing the interest of justice. No specific legal provisions or precedents were cited. Revenue's Contention: The learned Departmental Representative (DR) supported the impugned order but did not object to restoring the appeals to the AO's file.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153A,Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA �ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सट�य एवं �ी �द�प कुमार चौबे, �या�यक सद�य के सम� [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.(S.S) A. Nos.33, 34 & 35/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sanjay Rungta Vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), Kolkata

(PAN: ADEPR 5164 P)

( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 20.05.2025 क� �त�थ Date of Pronouncement/ 22.05.2025 आदेश उ�घोषणा क� �त�थ For the assessee / Shri Devesh Poddar �नधा�रती क� ओर से For the revenue / राज�व Shri Madanappa Raghuvir, CIT DR क� ओर से

ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM:

These are the appeals preferred by the assessee against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 21, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 21.01.2025 for AY 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 respectively. In all the

2 I.T.(S.S)A. Nos. 33, 34 & 35/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sanjay Rungta appeals, issues are common, hence taken up together for disposal. We take in IT(SS)A No. 33/Kol/2025 for AY 2012-13 as a lead case.

2.

Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the residential and business premises of Rungta group situated at various locations, the assessee belongs to this group. A notice u/s 153A of the Act in response to the notice, the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 11,12,410/- for AY 2012-13. Notices u/s 143(2) along with questionnaires were issued. The Ld. A.R of the asse only submitted copy of balance sheet etc. but there was non-compliance made in relation to the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, as a result of which, assessment order was passed declaring total income of Rs. 14,70,410/-.

3.

Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein also the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of response.

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

4.

The Ld. A.R, instead of arguing into the merit of the case in all the three appeals, only submitted that the appeal of the assessee be restored into the file of AO by giving an opportunity to the assessee to place all the facts and documents. The assessee prayed that for the interest of justice, the assessee has to be given an opportunity to place his case before the AO.

5.

Contrary to that the Ld. D.R supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection in restoring the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO.

6.

Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties, we have perused the order of Ld. CIT(A) and find that the assessment was done when there was non-compliance on behalf of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) has also dismissed the appeal of the assessee as there was no response on behalf of the assessee. Keeping in view, the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) and for the interest of justice, we are remitting the appeal of the assessee back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication.

3 I.T.(S.S)A. Nos. 33, 34 & 35/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sanjay Rungta The assessee is also directed to co-operate in the proceedings. The order passed by both the lower authorities are here by set aside. The case is remitted back to the file of AO.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 22nd May, 2025

Sd/- Sd/-

(Rajesh Kumar/राजेश कुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /�द�प कुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य Judicial Member/�या�यक सद�य Dated: 22nd May, 2025 SM, Sr. PS

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Sanjay Rungta, Pushpanjali, Bariatu Road, Ranchi-834008. 2. Respondent – ACIT, Central Circle- 3(1), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)- 21, Kolkata 4. Ld. PCIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →