MANOJ KUMAR PATODIA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR. 4(2), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 25/KOL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 August 20223 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as academic, noting that no additions were made by the Assessing Officer and the assessee did not appear. Adjudicating the reopening grounds was deemed unnecessary without further details from the assessee.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment based on information about the assessee operating a Swiss bank account. However, the department could not find any transaction details to support an addition to income.

What were the issues?

Whether reopening of assessment was justified when no income escaped assessment was found, and whether the appeal is maintainable when the assessee is not present and no additions were made.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B(SMC

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata dated 26.11.2021 passed for the assessment year 2006-07. In response to the notice of hearing, no one has come present on behalf of the assessee. However, with the assistance of ld. D.R., we have gone through the record carefully and proceed to decide the appeal ex-parte.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the ld. Assessing Officer got information that the assessee had operated Bank Account in Switzerland with the HSBC Bank. He reopened the assessment. During the course of Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Manoj Kumar Patodia scrutiny assessment, ld. Assessing Officer found that out of the details transmitted to him, it cannot be determined whether any transaction has undertaken by the assessee or not, because the details of transactions were not transmitted to him. In other words, Department was unable to lay its hand on any of the information related to the assessee. Accordingly ld. Assessing Officer did not make any addition, rather he assessed the total income at Rs.23,60,380/-, which is the same income disclosed by the assessee in his return. The assessee is only challenging reopening of assessment on the strength that no information was possessed by the ld. A.O. to believe that income has escaped assessment.

3.

On due consideration of the above facts and circumstances, we do not wish to indulge in an academic exercise. Neither the assessee has put any appearance before the Tribunal nor dismissal of this appeal is going to affect the assessee in any manner including financial liabilities. The assessee has been litigating without any specific grievance. The ld. Assessing Officer had some information. He reopened the assessment. However, thereafter he found that nothing can be added in the hands of assessee on account of income escaped assessment. He accepted the return filed by the assessee and did not make any addition. In such a situation, adjudication of the grounds raised by the assessee, i.e. challenging the reopening of assessment, is just an academic exercise and we do not intend to indulge such exercise in the absence of any paper book and other details submitted by the assessee. Accordingly the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on August 2, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Girish Agrawal) (Rajpal Yadav) Accountant Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 2nd day of August, 2022 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Manoj Kumar Patodia Copies to : (1) Manoj Kumar Patodia, 170, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Burrabazar, Kolkata-700007

1.

(2) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata, 110, Shanti Pally, 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, Kolkata-700107

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →