M/S DEEPMALA VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.(SUCCESSOR OF HARSHMUKHI VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(4), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 964/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 November 2024AY 2012-13Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav (Vice President), Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to genuine and bonafide reasons. The appeal was restored to the file of the AO with a direction to decide the issue de novo after issuing fresh summons and allowing the assessee to comply.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a significant delay due to the prolonged illness and subsequent death of the person handling their tax matters. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition because summons issued under Section 131 to subscriber companies were not complied with, leaving the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of share capital unverified.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the matter should be remanded to the AO for fresh verification of share capital due to non-compliance with summons.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 131

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 30.08.2023.

Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Deepmala Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. (successor of Harshmukhi Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd.) 2. At the outset, we observe that there is a delay of 185 days in filing the appeal and the assessee has also filed condonation application along with Affidavit of the Director of the assessee company.

3.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the condonation petition along with Affidavit, we note that the delay in filing the appeal has occurred due to prolonged illness of Mr. Gopal Kedia who was looking after the tax matter of the assessee and finally expired on 21.10.2023. Thereafter the assessee came to know only in the month of March when the Departments started for payment of outstanding demand. Thereafter steps were taken to file the appeal immediately and was filed accordingly with a delay of 186 days. We note that the delay in filing the appeal is not attributable to the assessee nor any benefit is going to be accrued in favour of the assessee with the delayed filing of appeal. In our opinion, the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and is hereby condoned by relying of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 (SC). At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee stated before the Bench that the addition was made by the AO on account of fact that summon issued u/s 131 of the Act to the Director of the subscriber companies were not complied with and therefore the necessary verification of Rs. 7,85,55,000/- raised by way of share capital/ share application money could not be done. According to AO, the identities and creditworthiness of the subscribers and genuineness of the transactions remained unverified. The Ld. Counsel therefore submitted that the assessee may be given one more opportunity to comply with the summon before the AO by restoring the appeal to the file of the AO to which the Ld. D.R did not object. Accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of AO with the direction to decide the same de novo after issuing summon u/s 131 to all the parties and the assessee is also directed to co-operate and produce the Principal officers of all the subscriber companies for examination as undertaken before us by the counsel for the assessee.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 20th November, 2024

Sd/- Sd/- (Rajpal Yadav /राजपाल यादव) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश कुमार) Vice-President/उपा�य� Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य Dated: 20th November, 2024 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- M/s Deepmala Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., (successor to Harshmukhi Vyapaar pvt. Ltd.) 40/3, Strand Road, 5th Floor, Kolkata-700001 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. PCIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)

More judgments on Section 131

All 4,706 judgments and leading authorities on Section 131 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →