PURNA CHANDRA KANUNGO,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),CUTTACK, CUTTACK

ITA 844/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 October 2026AY 2013-145 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 763 days in filing the appeal, noting that the assessee had provided sufficient reasons in an affidavit and the revenue did not object. Regarding the substantive issue, the Tribunal held that the fixed deposits amounting to Rs. 11,66,891/- had not been examined by the AO. The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the AO for verification as to whether the said FDs related to the impugned assessment year (2013-2014) or were carry-forward FDs from earlier years. The reasoning was based on the fact that the crucial evidence (bank certificate) was not examined by the AO. The Tribunal directed that if the FDs are found to be carry-forwarded, no addition shall be made in the hands of the assessee, other than the interest that accrued during the impugned assessment year. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes with these directions.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Purna Chandra Kanungo, filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, for Assessment Year 2013-2014. The appeal was delayed by 763 days, which was condoned by the Tribunal after the assessee provided sufficient reasons in an affidavit and the revenue did not object. The Assessing Officer (AO) had brought to tax Rs. 11,66,891/- representing fixed deposits (FDs) in the name of the assessee and other family members. The assessee contended that these FDs did not relate to the impugned assessment year but originated from Assessment Year 1997-98. The assessee presented a certificate from the State Bank of India Staff Association Co-operative Society detailing the FDs as of March 31, 1997, and their continuation up to March 31, 2013, showing the disputed amount. It was admitted that this evidence was not produced before the AO.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should condone the delay of 763 days in filing the appeal by the assessee? (Procedural issue turning on the Tribunal's discretion and rules of procedure). 2. Whether the fixed deposits amounting to Rs. 11,66,891/-, standing in the name of the assessee and family members, relate to Assessment Year 2013-2014 or are carry-forward amounts from earlier assessment years? (Issue of mixed law and fact, concerning the determination of income under the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the fixed deposits in question originated from Assessment Year 1997-98 and continued until Assessment Year 2013-2014. They relied on a certificate from the State Bank of India Staff Association Co-operative Society to substantiate this claim. The assessee agreed to restore the issues to the AO for verification and production of the bank certificate. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue did not raise any serious objection to the condonation of delay and did not contest the assessee's submission regarding restoring the issue to the AO for verification.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY

Hearing: 06/10/2026Pronounced: 06/10/2026

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, in appeal No.NFAC/2012-13/10064982, dated 17/05/2024 for the assessment year 2013-2014. 2. Shri Mohit Sheth, ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, ld. Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 763 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating sufficient reasons for delay. Ld. Sr. DR also did not object to condone the same. Accordingly, considering the contents of the

2 ITA No.844/CTK/2026 affidavit filed by the assessee in regard to condonation of delay which are not found to be false, we condone the delay of 763 days in filing the appeal and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. 4. It was the submission of the ld. AR that the LR of the assessee has been brought on record. It was the submission that the AO had brought to tax Rs.11,66,891/- representing the fixed deposits which had been in the name of the assessee and other family members. It was the submission that these fixed deposits did not relate to the impugned assessment year, but were right from the assessment year 1997-98. The assessee has placed before us the certificate from the State Bank of India Staff Association Co-operative Society wherein the details of the FD as on 31/03/1997 and the further continuation of the same upto 31/03/2013, where this amount of Rs.11,66,891/- has been categorically specified, has been shown. It was the submission that, admittedly, this evidence had not been produced before the AO. It was fairly agreed by the learned AR that he has no objection if the issues are restored to the file of the AO and the assessee would produce the said certificate from the bank for verification. 5. In reply, the learned Sr. DR did not raise any serious objection. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. for the purpose of a sample, the certificate issued by the State Bank of India Staff Association Co-operative Society is attached for the year ended 31/03/2012 to 31/03/2013 as follows:-

3 ITA No.844/CTK/2026

4 ITA No.844/CTK/2026

This clearly shows that the FD which has been treated as the income of the assessee during the impugned assessment year, consists of an opening balance as on 01/04/2012 at Rs.7,23,099/- and interest during the year at Rs.4,43,792/-, totaling to Rs.11,66,891/-. However, as this evidence

5 ITA No.844/CTK/2026 has not been examined by the AO, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for verification as to whether the said FDs relate to this year or are carry forward FDs. If the FDs are found to be carry forwarded FDs, no addition shall be made in the hands of the assessee, other than the interest that has been accrued during the impugned assessment year. With these directions, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 06/10/2026. Sd/- Sd/- GOPALAN GURUSAMY GEORGE MATHAN लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER दिनाांक Dated 06/10/2026 RS आदेशकीप्रनतललपपअग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी/ The Appellant- 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी/ The Respondent- 3. आयकरआयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), आयकरआयुक्त/ CIT 4. आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, 5. ववभागीयप्रतततनधि, आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack गार्डफाईल / Guard file. 6.

सत्यावपतप्रतत //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →