MD. BABAR ALI,MALDA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), MALDA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal concerning the assessment, reducing the estimated profit rate. It allowed the appeals concerning penalties, cancelling them due to reasonable cause and the assessee's rural background and reliance on a consultant.
What were the facts?
The assessee initially failed to file an income tax return for AY 2020-21. Upon reopening the case, the assessee filed a return declaring a turnover and profit. The Assessing Officer estimated income at a higher rate due to non-furnishing of books, and penalties were levied for non-compliance.
What were the issues?
The key issues were the estimation of business income in the absence of books and the levy of penalties for non-compliance with audit report filing and notice responses.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B,Section 44AB,Section 271B,Section 271(1)(b),Section 273B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
PER BENCH: These three appeals filed by the assessee are against the common order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2020-21 dated 18.11.2025. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 3173/KOL/2025:
“1. Order Bad in Law: That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 18.11.2025 is arbitrary and unjustified to the extent it confirms an addition to the returned income.
Unjustified Profit Estimation (5% vs 2.05%): That the Ld
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- A.Merchy Clara vs. The Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise (Appeals)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- Nallathambi Thangaraj vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IMadras · 13 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S. Hira Films PVT. LTD. vs. M/S. Prasad Film Labs (Mumbai) Private LimitedBombay · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Jung Bahadur Singh, Through Its Proprietor, Jang Bahadur Singh vs. The Union Of INDIA, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of RevenueJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026