ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA V. JAIDEEP HALWASIYA, KOLKATA

ITA 307/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata against Jaideep Halwasiya concerning the assessment year 2016-17. The primary contention was the addition of Rs.6,64,451 as business income by the Assessing Officer, which was later deleted by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) found no incriminating material during the search related to the assessee for the relevant assessment year, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in CIT Vs. Singhad Technical Education Society. The Tribunal, after reviewing the satisfaction note and the CIT(A)'s order, concurred with the CIT(A)'s findings and dismissed the revenue's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 360654 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs. Singhad Technical Education Society reported in 397 ITR 344
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MONALISA PAL MUKHERJEE
• Assessee Lawyers: S. K. TULSIYAN; LATA GOYAL; MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.; REPRESENTING
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.307/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 ACIT, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Jaideep Halwasiya 3rd floor, P-24, India Exchange Place, Kolkata- 700001. (PAN: AAWPH1706L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Ms. Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, JCIT, Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Lata Goyal, AR Date of Hearing : 22.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.05.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : The captioned appeal filed by the revenue is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27 [in short “CIT(A)”] vide order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1070689799(1) dated 27.11.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. Ms. Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, JCIT, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue and Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate along with Ms. Lata Goyal, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee. 2 ITA No. 307/Kol/2025 Jaideep Halwasiya, AY: 2016-17 3. It was submitted by the Ld. DR that in the course of assessment the Assessing Officer had made various additions and had assessed the income of the assessee by making an addition of Rs.6,64,451/- representing business income. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition by annulling the assessment order on the ground that in the course of search no incriminating material pertaining to the assessee was found and consequently no proceeding u/s. 153C of the Act could be initiated in the case of the assessee in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Singhad Technical Education Society reported in 397 ITR 344. The Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities. 4. In reply, the Ld. AR of the assessee drew our attention to page 253 of the paper book, which was the satisfaction note recorded for initiation of proceeding u/s. 153C in the case of the assessee. It was the submission that for the AY 2016-17, being the impugned assessment year, there is no satisfaction recorded in regard to any incriminating material having been found. The said satisfaction note reads as follows: 3 ITA No. 307/Kol/2025 Jaideep Halwasiya, AY: 2016-17 5. It was the submission that as the Ld. CIT(A) has taken into consideration the fact that there was no incriminating material found in the course of search relating to the assessee for the impugned assessment year, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is liable to be upheld. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case as also a perusal of the satisfaction note issued in respect of the initiation of proceeding u/s. 153C of the Act in the case of the assessee merely shows that for the impugned assessment year there is no incriminating material found and hence, there could be no assessment u/s. 153C of the Act. Further perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) clearly shows that the Ld. CIT(A) in para 5.2.6 at page 21 of his order has categorically given the finding that there was no incriminating material in regard to the impugned assessment year. This being so, as the revenue has not been able to dislodge any of the fact before us, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue stands upheld and the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order is dictated and pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 22nd May, 2025 JD, Sr. P.S. 4 ITA No. 307/Kol/2025 Jaideep Halwasiya, AY: 2016-17 Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Shri Jaideep Halwasiya 2. The Respondent- ACIT,Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A), Kolkata-27. 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata 6. Guard file. True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "