DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CNETRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DILIP KUMAR GHOSH, KOLKATA
Facts
The Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition of ₹82,69,292/- made by the AO under sections 69A and 115BBE for unexplained cash payments based on seized documents (DKG-01, DKG-04). The assessee, a director of Jagatbandhu Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd., contended that these entries pertained to the company and represented agricultural income, which was already accounted for and exempt under section 10(1). The assessee also filed a Cross Objection against the CIT(A)'s order.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the Revenue's 49-day delay in filing the appeal. It noted that the issue was squarely covered by a previous Tribunal decision in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 2017-18, which had deleted a similar addition. Following this precedent, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, concluding that the cash receipts from green tea leaves sales and payments to labourers were duly accounted for as exempt agricultural income. The assessee's Cross Objection was dismissed as not pressed.
Key Issues
Whether the addition made under section 69A read with section 115BBE for unexplained cash payments was justified, given the assessee's claim that the entries were duly accounted for by a company and constituted exempt agricultural income.
Sections Cited
Section 69A, Section 115BBE, Section 10(1), Section 153A, Section 132
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:
These are the appeals preferred by the Revenue and CO by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)(hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 27.02.2025 for the AY 2018-19.
At the outset, we observe from the appeal folder that there is a delay of 49 days in filing the appeal by the department in support of which
The Revenue in this appeal has raised the issue of deletion of addition of ₹82,69,292/- as made by the ld. AO u/s 69A of the Act read with section 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash payment without appreciating the material brought on record by the ld. AO whereas the assessee in its Cross Objection has challenged the order of ld. CIT (A) on various grounds.
After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the issue in the instant appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s own case under similar facts in DCIT Vs. Dilip Kumar Ghosh in ITA No. 1253/KOL/2025 for A.Y. 2017-18, vide order dated 20.01.2026, wherein similar issue has been decided by the co- ordinate Bench in favour of the assessee. We note that the addition was made by the ld. AO on the basis of seized documents DKG-01 and DKG-04, by observing that cash payments as contained in those documents were unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. We note that the similar issue was also involved in the previous assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2017-18 based on the same document DKG-01 and DKG-04, which was deleted by the Tribunal by observing and holding as under:-
Coming to the Cross Objection raised by the assessee, which is not pressed at the time of hearing and is dismissed as not pressed.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and CO of the Assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced on 26.02.2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 26.02.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT DR, ITAT, 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata
