SHREE MALLIKARJUN SHIPPING PRIVATE LIMITED,VASCO vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 March 2026AY 2007-087 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal addressed two primary issues. Firstly, regarding the validity of reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Tribunal noted that the initial assessment was completed on December 29, 2009, and subsequent reopening occurred due to survey operations on September 22, 2011, with a notice under Section 148 issued on March 28, 2014. The Tribunal found that the notice was issued within six years from the end of AY 2007-08 and upheld the CIT(A)'s finding on the validity of reassessment, dismissing this ground of appeal. Secondly, concerning the addition under Section 69A, the Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered the assessee's submissions and evidence filed during the appellate proceedings. Citing principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to provide the assessee with one more opportunity to substantiate its case. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order on this issue and remitted it back to the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh, with a direction to provide the assessee with adequate opportunity of hearing and to cooperate in submitting information for early disposal. The grounds of appeal on this issue were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shree Mallikarjun Shipping Private Limited, engaged in barge transportation, iron ore trading, and cargo handling, filed its return for AY 2007-08 on October 31, 2007, declaring an income of Rs. 80,21,230. The case was initially assessed under Section 143(3) on December 29, 2009. Following survey operations under Section 133A on September 22, 2011, the case was reopened under Section 147, and an assessment was completed on March 28, 2013, at Rs. 1,16,96,177. Subsequently, the case was reopened again under Section 147, with a notice under Section 148 issued on March 28, 2014. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings based on evidence of cash transactions aggregating to Rs. 51,19,000 from FY 2006-07, seized during a search in another entity's case. The AO invoked Section 69A, making an addition of Rs. 51,19,000, and passed an order under Section 143(3) r.w.s 147 on March 30, 2015, assessing total income at Rs. 1,68,15,177. The CIT(A) sustained the validity of reassessment and the addition under Section 69A, partly allowing the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are valid, particularly concerning the issuance of notice under Section 148 after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the reassessment proceedings were invalid as the notice under Section 148 was issued after the expiry of the four-year period from the end of the assessment year. The assessee also contended that the CIT(A) failed to deal with the submissions and details filed to substantiate that all transactions were accounted for, rendering Section 69A inapplicable. Revenue's Contention: The revenue argued that the notice under Section 148 was issued within the validity period and that the assessee failed to provide requisite details of cash transactions. The revenue supported the CIT(A)'s order. 2. Whether the addition of unexplained money amounting to Rs. 51,19,000 under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is justified? Assessee's Contention: The assessee maintained that the cash transactions were duly recorded in its books of accounts and that Section 69A was not applicable. The assessee claimed to have provided all necessary details to the lower authorities. Revenue's Contention: The revenue supported the AO's finding and the CIT(A)'s order upholding the addition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250,Section 133A,Section 148,Section 69A,Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH PANAJI

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Ms. Komal Bandekar.AR
Hearing: 11.02.2026Pronounced: 17.03.2026

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 11.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 17.03.2026 ORDER

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM:

1.

The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of theADDL/JCIT(A)-6 Kolkata passed u/sec 143(3)r.w.s147 and U/sec 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) sustaining (i) validity of reassement proceedings u/sec147 of the Act and(ii)sustaining the addition u/sec69A of the Act made by the Assessing Officer.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee company is engaged in the business of Barge Transportation charges, traders in Iron ore including export and cargo handling services from infrastructure facility developed under the Boot. The assessee has filed the return of income for A.Y.2007-08 on 31.10 .2007 disclosing a total income of Rs.80,21,230/-. Subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 29.12.2009 accepting the returned income. There was survey operations u/sec133A of the Act on 22.09.2011 and as a result of survey the case was reopened u/sec147 of the Act and assessment was completed u/se 143(3)r.w.s147 of the Act on 28.03.2013 with the assessed income of Rs.1,16,96,177/-. Further the case was reopened u/sec147 of the Act and notice u/sec148 of the Act was issued on 28.03.2014. In compliance the assessee has filed a letter to treat the return filed earlier on 26.07.2012.Subsequently notice u/sec 143(2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act are issued. In compliance, the Ld.AR of the assessee appeared and filed the submissions and clarifications.

3.

Whereas the Assessing Officer( A.O) find that because of search u/sec132 of the Act in the case of Mr.Rashid Khan partner of M/s Trimurti exports , an evidence related to cash transactions of assessee and the partnership firm M/s Trimurti exports was seized. The A.O has considered the cash adjustment transactions and find that cash Shree Mallikarjun shipping Pvt Limited. receipt aggregating to Rs.51,19,000/- made in the F.Y.2006-07 was not accounted in the books of account and assessee was served with notice to explain the same. Since there was no compliance by the assessee, the A.O invoked the provisions of section69A of the Act and made addition of unexplained money of Rs.51,19,000/- and finally assessed the total income of Rs.1,68,15,177/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) r.w.s147 of the Act dated 30.03.2015.

4.

Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the A.O but has sustained the validity of reassessment proceedings u/sec147 of the Act and addition of unexplained money u/sec69A of the Act and the CIT(A)has granted relief in other grounds of appeal and partly allowed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal with the Hon’ble Tribunal.

5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming validity of reassement proceedings and addition of unexplained money u/sec69A of the Act made by the Assessing officer overlooking the information of the proceedings. The Ld.AR mentioned that there is no justification to reopen the case by issue of notice u/sec148 of the Act after expiry of 4 years period from the end of the assessment year and also Shree Mallikarjun shipping Pvt Limited. the CIT(A) has not dealt on the submissions and details filed in the appellate proceedings to substantiate that the assessee has accounted all transactions in their books of accounts and the provisions of section 69A of the Act are not applicable. The Ld.AR supported the submissions with the factual paper book and prayed for allowing the appeal. Per Contra, the Ld.DR submiited that the notice u/sec148 of the Act was issued within the validity period and the assessee has not filed the requisite details of cash transactions and the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A).

6.

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The crux of the disputed issues in the grounds of appeal of the assessee that that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings u/sec147 of the Act and sustaining the addition u/sec69A of the Act without providing proper opportunity and overlooking the facts and material evidences. The assesse has filed all the details before the lower authorities and the CIT(A) has not considered the documents and information supporting the claim of the assesse. On the first disputed issue of validity of reassessment proceedings u/sec147 of the Act, the Ld.AR contentions are that notice was issued after expiry of 4 years, we find that the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 29.12.2009 accepting the returned income and due to survey Shree Mallikarjun shipping Pvt Limited. operations u/sec133A of the Act on 22.09.2011,the case was reopened u/sec147 of the Act and assessment was completed u/se 143(3)r.w.s147 of the Act on 28.03.2013 with the assessed income of Rs.1,16,96,177/-.And again the case was reopened u/sec147 of the Act and notice u/sec148 of the Act was issued on 28.03.2014.We find that notice was issued within 6 years after the end of relevant asstyearA.Y.2007-08, and the CIT(A) has considered the facts and provisions of section147 of the Act and upheld the validity of reassement and accordingly, we do not find infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) on this disputed of validity of issue of notice u/sec148 of the Act and uphold the same and dismiss this ground of appeal

of the assessee. .On the second disputed issue, the Ld.AR highlighted that the cash transactions are duly recorded in the books of accounts and the assesee has a good case on merits. Prima-facie, the CIT(A) has dealt on the findings of the AO and has not considered the submissions/evidences of the assesse filed in the proceedings and has not allowed the grounds of appeal. Therefore, considering the facts, submissions and principles of natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and remit the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the Shree Mallikarjun shipping Pvt Limited. information for early disposal of the appeal. And the grounds of appeal of the assessee on this disputed issue are allowed for statistical purposes.

7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.03.2026.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →