ARUP KUMAR CHATTERJEE,KOLKATA V. I.T.O., WARD - 26(4), KOLKATA

ITA 1821/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Arup Kr. Chatterjee, the appellant, who contested an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)), which was passed ex parte due to non-compliance from the assessee. Initially, Chatterjee filed a return for the assessment year 2017-18, which was later revised. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) assessed a significantly higher income than declared, leading to an appeal. The CIT(A)'s dismissal of the appeal without merit consideration prompted Chatterjee to approach the ITAT. The ITAT, upon reviewing the circumstances, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough re-examination on merits, providing Chatterjee another opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785635 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 12-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Revised return
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No.1821/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arup Kr. Chatterjee……………………………………………….…….……Appellant 22A, Hemchandra Mukherjee Road, Barish Kolkata-8. [PAN: AFMPC1447G] vs. ITO, Ward-26(4), Kolkata..………………………..………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Ankit Jalan, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Pankaj Pandey, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : October 14, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : October 27, 2025 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.06.25 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘CIT(A)’] passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. Brief facts of the case are that in this case, the assessee had filed his return of income on 30.10.2017 for A.Y. 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs. 6,15,590/-. Further the assessee filed revised return showing total income of Rs. 4,50,220/-. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS with a reason 'Large Sales promotion expenses vis-is gross receipts'. Notice u/s 143(2) of the IT Act was issued on 22.09.2019 and served upon the appellant. Notices u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued time to time. The AO completed the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1821/Kol/2025 Arup Kr. Chatterjee 2 assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2019 and assessed the appellant's total income of Rs.1,23,67,640/- by making addition of Rs.1,23,77,644/- on account of business and profession. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal has been dismissed by passing an ex parte order as there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee has come in appeal before us. The ld. AR instead of arguing on merits of the case has only prayed that the appeal of the assessee may be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration by affording opportunity to the assessee of hearing as the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order and not on the merits and also the assessee failed to prove its case before the ld. CIT(A). 5. The ld. DR did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal of the assessee to the file of the ld. CIT(A). 6. After hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties and particularly on perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), it appears to us that there was no compliance before the ld. CIT(A) which has resulted into passing the ex-parte order by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee did not file any explanation in order to submit any response to the notices issued and the order of the ld. CIT(A) have not been passed on merits rather passed on technical issue. Under these circumstances, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration after affording opportunity to the assessee of hearing. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the remand proceedings by submitting necessary explanations and evidences to substantiate its claim. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1821/Kol/2025 Arup Kr. Chatterjee 3 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 27th October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 27.10.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "