M/S VINAYAK FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2695/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 July 2025AY 2013-1426 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were flawed. The AO had issued a notice under Section 148 on March 11, 2021, to which the assessee filed objections on February 2, 2022. However, the assessment order was passed on February 28, 2022, without disposing of these objections. The Tribunal noted that while the objections were filed before the completion of the assessment, they were filed at the very last minute. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication. The AO was directed to dispose of the objections filed by the assessee on February 2, 2022. The Tribunal also noted that if the AO, after disposing of the objections, requires further verification regarding the Rs. 10 lakhs received from M/s Shivashiv Dealtrade Pvt. Ltd., the assessee would be at liberty to produce authorities to substantiate the claim. Furthermore, the AO was directed to provide the assessee with an adequate opportunity to rebut any adverse evidence proposed to be used.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Vinayak Financial Consultants Private Limited, filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A), Kolkata-27, for Assessment Year 2017-2018. The appeal was filed 31 days late, but the delay was condoned. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 based on information that the assessee received accommodation entries of Rs. 10 lakhs. The assessee filed objections to the reopening. The AO passed the assessment order without disposing of these objections. The assessee argued that this violated the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Champalal Omprakash. The assessee also contended that the AO did not provide details of the information source or allow cross-examination of persons whose statements were used. The assessee proposed restoring the issues to the AO for readjudication after disposing of the objections.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are valid when the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to dispose of the assessee's objections prior to passing the assessment order, in violation of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Champalal Omprakash? Assessee's contentions: The AO violated the decision in Champalal Omprakash by not disposing of the objections filed by the assessee before passing the assessment order. The AO also failed to provide details of the information source and denied the opportunity for cross-examination. The assessee suggested restoring the matter to the AO for readjudication after disposing of the objections. Revenue's contentions: The revenue's representative vehemently relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(1),Section 139(1),Section 131,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(19)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tulsyan & Shri Robin, Smt. Madhumita Das, Sr.DR
For Respondent: Smt. Madhumita Das, Sr.DR
Hearing: 10/07/2025Pronounced: 10/07/2025

(नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) M/s Vinayak Financial Consultants Vs DCIT, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata Private Limited, 54A, Sarat Bose Road, Arrjavv Building,West Bengal. PAN No. : AACCV 6185 E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri A.K.Tulsyan & Shri Robin Maheshwari, Ars : Smt. Madhumita Das, Sr.DR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 10/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 10/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Kolkata-27, dated 26.09.2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-2018.

2.

Shri A.K.Tulsyan & Shri Robin Maheshwari, ld.ARs appeared on behalf of the assessee and Smt. Madhumita Das, ld. Sr.DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.

3.

The appeal of the assessee is barred by 31 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed affidavit stating sufficient reasons for condonation of delay, which are also not found to be false. Ld. Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection. Accordingly, the delay of 31 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

4. It was the submission by the ld. AR that the Assessing Officer had received certain information that the assessee has received accommodation entries of Rs.10 lakhs and consequently initiated reopening proceedings. It was the submission that the assessee had responded to the reopening proceedings. The Assessing Officer did not dispose of the objection of the assessee and proceeded with the assessment in violation of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Champalal Omprakash, passed in ITAT/5/2025, GA/2/2025, dated 05.02.2025. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer has also not provided the details of the persons from whom he has received the said information nor provided the said persons who had given the statement for cross examination. It was the submission that he has no objection if the issues in this appeals are restored to the file of ld. Assessing Officer for readjudication after disposing off the objection filed by the assessee in line with the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Champalal Omprakash (supra).

5.

In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently relied on the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer & ld. CIT(A).

6.

I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that notice u/s.148 of the Act had been issued to the assessee on 11.03.2021. The assessee has filed its objection on 02.02.2022. The assessment order has been passed on 28.02.2022. Admittedly, the objection of the assessee has been filed before completion of the assessment but obviously it has been done at the very last minute for which the ld.AR says that on account of Covid the delay was occurred. Be that as it may, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication with a direction to the Assessing Officer to dispose off the objection filed by the assessee on 02.02.2022, which reads as under :-

7.

It is further noticed that the assessee has received Rs.10 lakhs from M/s Shivashiv Dealtrade Pvt.Ltd.. After disposing off the said objection of the assessee if the Assessing Officer thinks that some more verification is required on this issue, the assessee is at liberty to produce the authority of M/s. Shivashiv Dealtrade Pvt. Ltd. before the Assessing Officer and substantiate the claim of having provided the funds to the assessee.

8.

In the event that the Assessing Officer proposes to use any adverse evidence against the assessee, the Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity to the assessee to rebut the same.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →