Loading judgment…

RASMITA PANDA,CUTTACK vs ITO WARD1(1), CUTTACK | BharatTax

RASMITA PANDA,CUTTACK vs. ITO WARD1(1), CUTTACK

ITA 821/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 February 2026AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)1 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

The assessee received commission income of Rs. 30.00 lacs during the assessment year 2020-21. The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's books of account and treated the entire receipts as income. The assessee claimed expenses of 35% in respect of the earning of such income.

Held

The Tribunal considered the rival submissions and perused the facts. The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's books of account and estimated the entire receipts as income. The assessee submitted comparative profit percentages for preceding and succeeding years.

Key Issues

Whether the Assessing Officer was justified in rejecting the assessee's books of account and treating entire commission receipts as income, without allowing any expenses.

Sections Cited

148, 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA

For Appellant: Shri Diganta Das, A.R

For Respondent: Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr. DR

Hearing: 25/02/2026Pronounced: 25/02/2026

Assessee represented by Shri Diganta Das, A.R. Department represented by Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr. DR Date of hearing 25/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 25/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2019-20/10422992 dated 08/10/2025 for the A.Y. 2020-21.

2.

Shri Diganta Das, ld. A.R. appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjib Banerjee, ld. Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee received commission of Rs. 30.00 lacs from Kambson Express & Logistics India Private Limited during the impugned assessment year. TDS has also been deducted on the said commission. It was the submission that the assessee filed her return in response to the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) claiming expenses of 35% in respect of the earning of such income. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee’s books of account and treated the entire receipts as income of the assessee. It was a prayer that the claim of expenditure by the assessee may be allowed. It was the submission that the expenses were in the nature of commission payment, repairs to machinery, salary and wages, travelling expenses and also depreciation. It was the prayer that the expenses as claimed by the assessee may be allowed.

4.

In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A).

We have considered the rival submissions. Perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the Assessing Officer has rejected the books of account of the assessee and estimated the entire receipts of the assessee as income of the assessee. The assessee has filed written submissions which reads as follows: “The Appellant, Rasmita Panda (PAN: DBUPP9233C), is an individual resident in India, carrying on business activities primarily involving providing customer leads and execution of related service contracts in the logistics sector and freight forwarding agency services, leading to earning of commission income. The Appellant permanent residence is at D/o R. C Panda, Kanheipur, CRRI, Cuttack, Cuttack-753006, Odisha, India. The comparative year wise profit declared by the assessee immediately preceding year and subsequent year is as follows: Sl. Assessment Gross Receipt Net profit Profit Assessment Remarks No. Year % Status 1. 2019-20 26,50,000.00 11,48,251.00 43% 143(1) Returned Figure accepted 2. 2020-21 30,00,000.00 10,58,980.00 35% 147 Addition-Depreciation Rs. 168,978.00 & Gross commission income amounting Rs. 30,00,000.00 3 2021-22 32,81,150.00 17,06,200.00 52% 143(1) Returned Figure accepted Rasmita Panda Vs ITO That it is humbly submitted that the gross receipts for A.Y. 2020-21 increased compared to A.Y. 2019-20. Despite higher receipts, the profit percentage remained at a reasonable 35%, consistent with business realities. In the immediately succeeding year (A.Y. 2021-22), the profit percentage increased significantly to 52%, and the return was accepted under section 143(1). The returned figures for both preceding and succeeding years were accepted without scrutiny. Therefore, it is humbly prayed that the reopening under section 147 and addition of the entire gross commission income of Rs. 30,00,000, along with depreciation disallowance, is arbitrary and contrary to settled principles that only real income can be taxed, not gross receipts. Perusal of the written submissions shows that the assessee has shown profit of 43% for the immediately preceeding assessment year, 35% for the impugned assessment year and 52% for the immediately succeeding assessment year. Considering these facts, the income of the assessee is estimated at 40% for the impugned assessment year.