ARUN KUMAR DAS,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 7(2)/KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 304/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as the assessee has failed to substantiate the contention in the grounds of appeal during the appellate proceedings. 4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. The Ld. A.R instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only prayed that the assessee has to give an opportunity to place documentary evidences as required by the AO by remitting the appeal of the assessee back to the file 1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide documentary evidence to the AO and the CIT(A), leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the lower authorities. However, considering the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to grant an opportunity to the assessee to present the evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's return for AY 2017-18, declaring total income of Rs. 44,12,250/-, was selected for scrutiny due to an abnormal increase in cash deposits during the demonetization period. Despite notices, the assessee did not respond to the AO's requisition for information. The AO added unexplained cash credit and disallowance under section 14A, leading to a total income of Rs. 86,92,550/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to present documentary evidence after the lower authorities dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 14A,Section 68,Section 288A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA

ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM:

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), -NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 22.01.2025 for AY 2017-18.

Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arum Kumar Das 2. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee filed its return of income for AY 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs. 44,12,250/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and reason for selection as stated as there was abnormal increase during demonetization period as compared to average rate of cash deposit during demonetization period. The statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and in response to the notices final account TAR and copy of ITR were filed. Further requisition list including specified proforma of submission regarding cash deposit in Bank was sent to the assessee accompanied by a formal notice u/s 142(1) of the Act but there was no response. The Ld. A.O further considering the entire things as submitted by the assessee assessed the total income of the assessee as follows:

3.

Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as the assessee has failed to substantiate the contention in the grounds of appeal during the appellate proceedings.

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 has only prayed that the assessee has to give an opportunity to place documentary evidences as required by the AO by remitting the appeal of the assessee back to the file of AO. The Ld. A.R submits that the assessee failed to submit relevant documentary evidence before the AO and Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arum Kumar Das assessment was done due to non-filing of documentary evidences. The Ld. A.R further submits that the Ld. CIT(A) has also dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee failed to discharge his onus as he did not substantiate the contention in the grounds of appeal .

5.

Contrary to that the Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO for fresh consideration.

6.

We have gone through the order passed by the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) and there is no denying to this fact that when a formal notice u/s 142(1) has been sent to the assessee there was no response to the said requisition. The d. CIT(A) has also dismissed the appeal of the assessee as the assessee has failed to substantiate the contention in the grounds of appeal. The prayer of the assessee is that for the interest of justice the assessee has to give an opportunity to place his case.

7. Going over the order passed by lower authorities and considering the submission made by the assessee and for the interest of justice, we are inclined to restore the appeal back to the file of AO to pass a afresh order after considering the documentary evidence being essential for the just conclusion of the case. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the proceedings and shall not take adjournment on frivolous ground.

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

Order is pronounced in the open court on 17th July, 2025

Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi/संजय अव�थी) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /�द�प कुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य Judicial Member/�या�यक सद�य Dated: 17th July, 2025 SM, Sr. PS Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arum Kumar Das Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Arun Kumar Das, 85B, Lake Town, WB-700089 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-7(2), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. PCIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →