Loading judgment…
Facts
A survey under section 133A was conducted at the business premises of M/s. Sona Gold Agrochem Pvt. Ltd. It was found that the Kasera Group, which owns several companies involved in poultry feed and rice manufacturing, had taken accommodation entries for bogus long-term capital gains. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 15,11,000/- claimed as long-term capital gain and added it to the total income as undisclosed income.
Held
The tribunal observed that the appeal was time-barred by 45 days, but condoned the delay after considering the assessee's petition and the circumstances. The tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals) had dismissed the appeal without going into the merits, solely based on the assessee's participation in the DTVSVS 2024 Scheme. To ensure natural justice, the tribunal decided to provide the assessee another opportunity.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the case should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision on merits.
Sections Cited
133A, 143(2), 142(1), 251(1A), 246, 5 of DTVSV, 2020
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Appearances by: N o n e, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: June 23, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: July 22, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kolkata dated 1st January, 2025 passed for Assessment Year 2014-15.
(A.Y. 2014-2015) Anup Kumar HUF 2. The appeal is time barred by 45 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the ITAT. However, the assessee filed a condonation petition before the ITAT in support of condonation of delay of 45 days mentioning that the delay occurred due to the fact that rectification of the order of ld. Addl/JCIT(Appeals) was filed on 04.01.2025 and was pending on the due date of filing the appeal. The assessee-appellant waited for the disposal of the rectification petition and the rectification application was rejected on 08.04.2025 and after the receipt of the rectification order, the appeal was filed before the ITAT with a delay of 45 days.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, I am inclined to condone the delay of 45 days. Hence the delay is condoned.
The facts in brief are that a survey under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were carried out at the business premises of M/s. Sona Gold Agrochem Pvt. Ltd., Patna. The group consisted of a number of companies which are in the business of manufacturer of poultry feed and rice. The group of concerns are owned and managed by the Kasera Family of Patna, in particular, by Shri Amar Kasera and Shri Anup Kasera. It has been gathered that Patna based Kasera Group have taken accommodation entry of bogus long-term capital gain to the tune of Rs.6,64,14,403/- during the last several financial years. As per provision of income Tax Act, any capital gain arising out of transfer of long-term capital assets being an equity share in a company or a unit of equity- (A.Y. 2014-2015) Anup Kumar HUF oriented fund, on which STT is paid, is exempt from taxation point of view. These beneficiary provisions have been misused by the syndicates to arrange accommodation entry of bogus long-term capital gain through trading of shares of penny stock on the stock exchange. The total income of the assessee as per return of income for the year under consideration was Rs.11,89,410/-. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 11.07.2018 requesting for compliance on 18.07.2018. Questionnaire along with notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued requesting for compliance on 25.07.2018. The assessee produced relevant documents but the appears that the assessee had earned an income of Rs.15,11,000/- on account of long-term capital gain. The assessee was asked to submit explanation. The assessee stated in its written reply that it sold the script of M/s. Kailash Auto and on that transaction, it claimed the exemption on LTCG. Being not satisfied, the ld. Assessing Officer disallowed Rs.15,11,000/- and added back to the total income of the assessee as undisclosed income from other sources of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and determined the total taxable income of the assessee at Rs,27,00,410/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
The assessee was not in a position to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals), but the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee stating that the assessee has already gone into Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (‘DTVSVS 2024’ Scheme) by filing Declaration in Form No. 1 and has received Form 2 from the Competent Authority intimating approval of petition (A.Y. 2014-2015) Anup Kumar HUF filed under the DTVSV Scheme, 2024 and Form 3 has been issued by the ld. Pr. CIT. The ld. CIT(Appeals) opined that as the Form 3 has been issued, the appeal has become infructuous as per sub- section (1) of section 5 of DTVSV, 2020. The provision of section 251(1A) read with provision of section 246 confers no jurisdiction upon the office of ld. Commissioner to permit withdrawal of an appeal until the conditions of section 251(1A) are fulfilled and, therefore, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative pleaded to uphold the order of ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) as the assessee did not submit any documentary evidence in support of its claim.
I have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going into the merit of the case only depending ‘DTVSVS 2024’ Scheme. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a condonation petition mentioning the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT. Therefore, in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, I am of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. As the assessee did not file the details of its claim before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) as asked for, therefore, I remit the matter back to the file of ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him and to decide it afresh after going into merit of the case.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/07/2025.