M/S. KISHAN KUMAR KANDOI HUF,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 44(2), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers

ITA 954/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 December 2025AY 2015-2016Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, accepting it as bonafide and genuine. It restored the matter to the Assessing Officer, directing a fresh decision after providing the assessee with the statements of the Directors of the allottee companies and affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, which was delayed by 431 days. The Assessing Officer had relied on statements from Directors of allottee companies in the original assessment without confronting the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the Assessing Officer's reliance on unconfronted statements of third-party directors, without providing an opportunity of being heard, was valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,KOLKATA

Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Sunil Surana, AR Department represented by : Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 17.12.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 19.12.2025 O R D E R The present appeal filed by the assessee arises from order dated 15.12.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)].

At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 431 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reason, hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal in the following paras.

M/s Kishan Kumar Kandoi HUF 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought to our attention the observations of the AO in assessment order at page 16 para 1 wherein the AO relied on the statement of the Directors of the allottees Companies without confronting the same to the assessee. Accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of AO with a direction to decide the issue afresh after providing the assessee statement of the Directors of the allottees. Accordingly, appeal is set aside to the file of AO with a direction to decide the same after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 19.12.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →