AMAR IRON UDYOG PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA V. DCIT, CC-3(3), KOLKATA

ITA 2848/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by Amar Iron Udyog Pvt. Ltd. against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata-21, for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The first appeal contested the addition of 30 lacs to the assessee's income, treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The second appeal challenged an addition of 34,64,771 under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The Tribunal found procedural errors in the appellate orders and decided to remand the cases back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837985 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D HEERAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDARTH AGARWAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68; 2(22)(e)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITA Nos. 2847 & 2848/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year:2011-12) Amar Iron Udyog Pvt. Ltd. C/o. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite No.213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata- 700069, West Bengal Vs. DCIT, CC 3(3) Aaykar Bhawan, 110, Shanti Pally, E.M. By pass, Kolkata- 700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AACCA7898R Assessee by : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri Dheeraj, DR Date of hearing: 09.02.2026 Date of pronouncement: 17.02.2026 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: These are appeals preferred by the assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata-21, (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] even dated 10.09.2025 for the AY 2011- 12. A.Y. 2011-12 2847/KOL/2025 2. The issue raised by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the addition of ₹30 lacs as made by the ld. AO on account of share capital received by invoking the provisions of Section 68 of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA Nos. 2847 & 2848/KOL/2025 Amar Iron Udyog Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2011-12 3. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the ld. AO has made an addition in respect of share capital raised by the assessee during the year by treating the same as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and thereby making an addition of ₹30 lacs, whereas the ld. CIT (A) while passing an appellate order wrongly extracted the facts of some different assessee dealing with the issue of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and thus, confirming the addition by mentioning the amount as ₹34,64,771/-. Therefore, this appears to be case of inadvertence on the part of the ld. CIT (A) to the facts of the case as recorded by the ld. AO. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the ends of justice will be well served if the appeal is resorted to the file of the ld. CIT (A) by re-adjudicate after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, we restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT (A) to decide the same on merit after hearing the assessee afresh. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. A.Y. 2011-12 2848/KOL/2025 4. The issue raised by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the order of the ld. AO wherein the addition of ₹34,64,771/- , was made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 5. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the appellate order has been passed by the ld. CIT (A) ex-parte when the assessee failed to respond the various opportunities allowed by the ld. CIT (A) resulting into passing an ex- parte order. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that ends of justice will be well served if the assessee is given one more Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 ITA Nos. 2847 & 2848/KOL/2025 Amar Iron Udyog Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2011-12 opportunity of hearing before the ld. CIT (A) to present its case. Accordingly, we restore the issue to the file of the ld. CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same after affording the assessee an opportunity of hearing. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.02.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 17.02.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. Printed from counselvise.com "