SRI BIPUL KUMAR DEY,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee's submission needs to be verified by the Assessing Officer. If the receipt from L.I.C. was indeed not received, the balance sheet should be redrafted and a fresh adjudication made.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 8,10,000 as unexplained money. The assessee contended that the cash balance in the balance sheet was incorrect due to a mistake by the accountant who showed it as a balancing figure after wrongly recording a receipt from L.I.C.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition of Rs. 8,10,000 as unexplained money was justified, considering the assessee's claim of an error in the balance sheet due to a mistaken entry.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member] Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sri Bipul Kumar Dey….……………..……………………...……………………..……….Appellant Pankoj Kumar Sarkar & Co. Chartered Accountants D-14, R.S. Bithi City Centre Durgapur-16, Burdwan (W.B.) [PAN : AHHPD 7072 M] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Durgapur…………………….…….……...Respondent Aaykar Bhawan City Centre Durgapur – 713 216 Burdwan Appearances by: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, FCA, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sailen Kumar Dey, Addl. CIT, DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : January 18th, 2018 Date of pronouncing the order : March 14th, 2018 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-
This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT (A)’), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 30/06/2017.
There is a delay of 276 days in filing of this appeal. After perusing the petition for condonation of delay as well as the affidavit filed in support of the same, I am convinced that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in filing of the appeal in time. Hence, I condone the delay and admit this appeal. After hearing rival contentions, I hold as follows:-
The only ground is against the addition of Rs.8,10,000/-, as unexplained money by the Assessing Officer. The sole contention of the 2 Sri Bipul Kumar Dey Assessment Year: 2010-11 assessee is that the cash balance as declared by the assessee in its balance sheet was not correct. It was submitted that the accountant made a mistake by showing cash balance as a balancing figure for the reason that a wrong receipt of Rs.8,83,390/-, was shown as receipt from L.I.C. He submits that there was no receipt from L.I.C. at all and that this wrong recording of fact by the part time accountant led to this mistake which resulted in the addition.
In my view, this submission of the assessee has to be verified by the Assessing Officer. If the amount was not received from L.I.C., as shown in the balance sheet of the assessee, then it is a case where the balance sheet has to be redrafted and fresh adjudication be made. In view of the above discussion, I set aside this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to verify the claim of the assessee that it had not received any amount from L.I.C. as recorded. If this claim of the assessee is factually correct, the balance sheet of the assessee may be held as incorrect. If the cash balance has been shown by the accountant as a balancing figure and when the same is not supported by any other material, then it has to be ignored. Hence I set aside the appeal of the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, in accordance with law.
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026