SANTLAL ENTERPRISE,SILIGURI vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), , SILIGURI

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 19.03.2025 for the AY 2018-19. 02. The issue raised in ground no.1 by the assessee is against the order of learned CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Act dated
19.03.2025 is bad in law and the same may be quashed.
03. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee filed the return of income on 08.06.2018, declaring total income at ₹nil. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS, statutory notices along with questionnaire were duly served upon the assessee. The assessee complied with the said
Santlal Enterprise; A.Y. 2018-19

notices by filing various details/ evidences before the learned AO electronically. Thereafter, the learned AO issued show cause notice along with draft assessment order on 13.04.2021, calling upon the assessee to furnish various documents along with reasons for disputing draft assessment order. The assessee requested for the adjournment till 15.04.2021. On 15.04.2021, the assessee moved an adjournment petition upto 25.04.2021, stating that the assessee is engaged in the process of gathering material. However, the learned
AO passed the final assessment order on 21.04.2021, making the addition of ₹2,73,30,000/- to the total income of the assessee comprising addition u/s 56(2)(x) of the Act of ₹2,50,00,000/- and addition u/s 68 of the Act read with section 115BBE of the Act of ₹23,30,000/-.
04. In the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT (A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition of ₹2,50,00,000/- as made by the learned AO u/s 50(2)(x) of the Act and the Revenue is not in appeal before us while the learned CIT (A) sustained the addition of ₹23,30,000/-.
05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that ₹23,30,000/- was added by the learned AO on protective basis u/s 68 of the Act read with section 115BBE of the Act as unexplained cash deposit. In our opinion the protective assessment is a type of assessment made in order to protect the interest of the Revenue nonetheless there is no provision in the Income Tax Act to charge tax on a person other than a person on whom the tax is lawfully payable but its customary to make protective / alternative addition if it is not ascertainable as to who is the real person who is liable to pay the tax. In other words, if the Santlal Enterprise; A.Y. 2018-19
Kolkata, Dated: 15.10.2025
Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS
Santlal Enterprise; A.Y. 2018-19

Copy of the Order forwarded to:

BY ORDER,//

Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst.