MINA PRADHAN,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 42(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SRI SANJAY GARG & SRI RAKESH MISHRA
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'बी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री संजय गगग, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.: 1587 & 1588/KOL/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Mina Pradhan ITO, Ward-42(4), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: BDRPP7332M Appearances: Assessee represented by :Anil Kochar & Aryan Kochar, Adv. Department represented by : Gautam Patra, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : November 21st, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : November 27th, 2024 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeals filed by the assessee are against separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ld. 'CIT(A)'] for AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 dated 25.06.2024. As the issues in both the appeals are common, they are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.
Page 2 of 10
3.3 Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) in which one of the grounds was that application of Section 69C of the Act which pertains to unexplained expenditure was totally contrary and opposite to the facts of the case as no purchases were ever made from the party and the Ld. AO erred in not accepting that the sales made to SINPL were merely accommodation sales/bill entry and that no actual sales or purchases were ever effected. The Ld. AO ought to have accepted the sales made to SINPL as only accommodation sales bill entry for earning 1% commission. In response to the notice of hearing issued by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed submission and reiterated the claim that no purchases were made but in effect only accommodation entries were provided for which a commission @ 1% ought to have been accepted. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition by giving the following finding as per para 5.2 onwards which is reproduced below: Page 4 of 10
Page 5 of 10
Page 6 of 10
Page 7 of 10
Page 8 of 10
Page 9 of 10
Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata
Page 10 of 10