BENGAL SHELTER HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal admitted additional evidence filed by the assessee and restored all issues on merit to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh examination. The CIT(A) was directed to pass a speaking order after providing an opportunity of hearing and potentially calling for a remand report.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) included grounds challenging additions on account of unexplained cash credit and the value of land included under Work-in-Progress. The assessee admitted to not furnishing complete documentary proof before the lower authorities.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order and confirming additions without proper opportunity and examination of evidence. Whether the additional evidence filed before the ITAT should be admitted and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA
This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Ld. CIT(A)] dated 7th December, 2023, for Assessment Year 2018-19, which is arising from the assessment order dated 14th April, 2021, passed by the National e- assessment Centre, Delhi (Ld. AO) under section 143(3) read with section 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: -
2. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs.60,00,000/- made by the A.O. on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act.
3. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs.20,49,96,299/- made by the A.O. on account of the value of land included under WIP registered in the name of West Bengal Housing Board against which the company has subsequently received development rights.
4. The appellant craves leave to add further grounds of appeal or alter the grounds at the time of hearing.”
At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee failed to file certain documentary proof before the learned CIT (A) in support of its grounds of appeal and if an opportunity is granted for restoring the issues raised on merit to the file of the learned CIT (A) then the assessee is quite hopeful to succeed.
On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative though supported the orders of lower authorities but was fair enough in not objecting to the request made by the learned counsel for the assessee
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We note that the assessee which is a limited company engaged in the business of development and execution of real estate projects, filed its regular return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 26th November, 2018, declaring nil income. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny followed by validly serving notices under Section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. In reply to questionnaire issued under Section 142(1) of the Act certain details were filed, however, assessee failed to furnish complete details. As a result of which the learned Assessing Officer made certain additions assessing income at approx ₹21.10 crore.
Further, we note that when the assessee challenged the additions made by the learned Assessing Officer before the learned CIT (A) then except filing form no. 35 and statement of facts, assessee failed to furnish requisite information with regard to the issue of recognition of revenue and details of land transfer. Assessee also failed to furnish the evidence to explain the alleged credit received from two parties namely Sivarpan Engineering Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Hori Properties Pvt. Ltd.
Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee has furnished the additional evidences in the paper book containing 87 pages which includes affidavit filed by the assessee, copies of agreement between West Bengal
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd August, 2024.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- Kundan Patel vs. State Bank Of INDIAMadhya Pradesh · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Pacific Export vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Kashiram Fuels Lole Propritorship Firm Through Proprietor Swati vs. Bank Of INDIAMadhya Pradesh · 13 Oct 2026
