AVADHESH KUMAR PANDEY,DURGAPUR V. I.T.O., WARD - 2(4), , DURGAPUR

ITA 2215/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Avadhesh Kumar Panday, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, Delhi, which had dismissed his appeal for want of prosecution. The original assessment by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, added a substantial amount of Rs. 67,32,72,220 as unexplained money under section 69A, due to non-filing of income tax returns despite significant banking transactions. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte as the assessee failed to comply with notices, which were sent to an email address the assessee was unaware of. The ITAT found the dismissal by the CIT(A) to be without a fair hearing and remitted the case back for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 469703 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 147; 144; 69A

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 2215/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Avadhesh Kumar Panday (PAN: AYEPP 6636 R) Vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Durgapur Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 11.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 26.03.2025 For the assessee /Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Smt. Swati Baid, A.R For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT DR ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 29.07.2024 for AY 2019-20. 2. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 39 days for this the assessee has filed condonation petition., which are as follows- 2 I.T.A. No. 2215/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Avadhesh Kumar Panday 3 I.T.A. No. 2215/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Avadhesh Kumar Panday On perusal of the condonation petition, the reason for delay in filing the appeal seems to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the 4 I.T.A. No. 2215/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Avadhesh Kumar Panday delay. Keeping in view, the condonation petition as well as judicial pronouncement that the case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the case of the assessee was reopened on the ground that the assessee did not file any return of income though there was substantial banking transaction in the relevant year. The AO after issuing show cause notices and considering the submission filed by the assessee, assessed the total income u/s 144 read with Section 147 by making an addition of Rs. 67,32,72,220/- u/s 69A being unexplained money. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of prosecution. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 5. The Ld. Counsel instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only submitted that the assessee has to given an opportunity to place his case before the Ld. CIT(A) as the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing an ex-parte order. The submission of the assessee is that all the notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(A) on the 8e-mail ID of the assessee and the assessee being a layman had totally unaware about the said notice, as a result of which, there was non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) and the appeal has been dismissed. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed an Affidavit and prayed that his case is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 6. Contrary to that the Ld. D.R though supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection in remitting back the appeal of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have gone through the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and find that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order as there was non-compliance on behalf of the assessee. Affidavit filed by the assessee in this context are as under- 5 I.T.A. No. 2215/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Avadhesh Kumar Panday 6 I.T.A. No. 2215/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Avadhesh Kumar Panday 8. Keeping in view the Affidavit filed by the assessee and for the interest of justice we are inclined to remit back the appeal of the assessee to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass an afresh order after hearing the assessee and the assessee is also directed to co-operate in the proceedings. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 26th March, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 26th March, 2025 SM, Sr. PS 7 I.T.A. No. 2215/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Avadhesh Kumar Panday Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Avadhesh Kumar Panday, 69, Moulana Azad City Centre, Durgapur, Burdwan, Bistupur, City Centre, Bardhaman, West Bengal, India-713216 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-2(4), Durgapur 3. Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. PCIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "