SERI MULTIPLE ASSET INVESTMENT,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-29, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2630/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 June 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had failed to adjudicate the appeal on merits despite a previous remand. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside both the CIT(A)'s and the AO's orders and remitted the matter back to the AO. The AO is directed to re-examine the assessee's submissions, grant appropriate relief, and make additions only after providing a fresh opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Category-II Alternative Investment Fund, filed its return for AY 2016-17. The AO made a significant addition of undisclosed interest income based on Form 26AS, assessing a higher total income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal as withdrawn, erroneously believing the assessee had opted for the VSVS scheme for the assessment order, whereas the option was only for the penalty order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal as withdrawn without adjudicating on merits, misinterpreting the assessee's election under the VSVS Scheme. 2. Whether income based solely on Form 26AS, without actual receipt, should be added to total income, and if the claim for bad debts/business loss should be considered.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 254,Section 143(3),Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

order

: 25-June-2025 ORDER

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2016-17 dated 24.10.2024, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 28.12.2018.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is Category-II Alternative Investment Fund registered with SEBI and had filed its return of income for AY 2016-17 showing total income of ₹ 21,12,430/-. The Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') added the undisclosed

More judgments on Section 234C

All 6,043 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →