APARNA SAHA,MALDA V. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), MALDA, MALDA

ITA 2355/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Aparna Saha, the appellant, who initially filed her income tax return for the Assessment Year 2020-2021, declaring an income of Rs.4,83,660. However, due to an oversight while responding to a notice under section 139(9), her declared income increased to Rs.8,29,340. The Assessing Officer accepted this revised income. Dissatisfied, Aparna Saha appealed to the CIT(Appeals), which was dismissed due to her non-cooperation and failure to provide necessary submissions. Subsequently, she appealed to the ITAT, which found that the CIT(Appeals) had not considered the case on its merits and thus remitted the case back for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473193 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 139(1)

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 2355/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2020-2021) Aparna Saha 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 2355/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Aparna Saha,……………………….…….....……Appellant Bakultala Lane, Mokdumpur, English Bazar, Malda-732101, West Bengal [PAN:AYOPS2368H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-3(1), Malda, Netaji Market Complex, Rathbari, Malda-732101, West Bengal Appearances by: Shri Sujit Basu, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: January 20, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: February 26, 2025 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals), Faridabad dated 28th September, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2002-21. ITA No. 2355/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2020-2021) Aparna Saha 2 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who filed her return of income under section 139(1) on 18.12.2020 showing total income of Rs.4,83,660/- after deduction of HBL interest under section 24(b) and also deduction under Chapter VIA. But while responding notice under section 139(9), the assessee had committed some mistakes due to oversite and her returned income shoot up to Rs.8,29,340/-. The appellant tried to rectify the mistake but could not do so on the plea that there was no mistake apparent from record. The ld. Assessing Officer assessed income at Rs.8,29,340/- instead of Rs.4,83,660/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 3. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assesese to substantiate its claim, but the appellant did not file the written submissions and did not represent the case before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal on 28th September, 2024. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. 5. At the time of hearing, it was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that ld. CIT(Appeals) did not consider the case on merit, rather he just upheld the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer. Therefore, he pleaded to delete the addition ITA No. 2355/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2020-2021) Aparna Saha 3 made by the ld. Assessing Officer as confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). 6. At the outset, ld. D.R. brought to my notice that the assessee did not produce the relevant documents as asked by the ld. Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order assessing the taxable income at Rs. 8,29,340/-. Thereafter the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given many opportunities to the assessee and the assessee neither filed written submission nor any evidence before the ld. CIT(Appeals). He further submitted that before the ITAT, the assessee did not substantiate her claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities. 7. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 2355/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2020-2021) Aparna Saha 4 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/02/2025. Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 26th day of February, 2025 Copies to :(1) Aparna Saha, Bakultala Lane, Mokdumpur, English Bazar, Malda-732101, West Bengal (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Malda, Netaji Market Complex, Rathbari, Malda-732101, West Bengal (3) Addl./JCIT(Appeals), Faridabad; (4) CIT - ; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. "