BHAWNA,ENGLISH BAZAR, MALDA V. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), MALDA

ITA 494/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Bhawna against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer under sections 69A and estimated profits from business under section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The appeal was initially delayed due to the appellant's lack of awareness and the negligence of her tax consultant. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's request for a fresh hearing, considering the procedural lapses and the substantive issues of justice involved.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669274 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 494/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2017-2018) Bhawna, C/o M/s Salarpuria Jalodia & Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700072 [PAN: AJAPB4693H] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Malda, Netaji Market Complex, 1st Floor, Rathbari, Malda - 732101 ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Siddarth Jhajharia, FCA Department represented by : Raja Sengupta, CIT-DR Date of concluding the hearing : 16.06.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 24.06.2025 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. In this case, the Registry has pointed out there is a delay of 341 days in the filing of this appeal. For this purpose, the assessee has filed two affidavits, one by the assessee and another by his tax counsel, to request condoning of the said delay. Both of these affidavits deserve to be extracted for reference: “I Bławna W/O- Nitesh Kumar, residing at Lokenath Para, Ward no.09, P.O+P.S- Dalkhola. Dist. Uttar dinajpur. West Bengal, 733201 being the Appellant do hereby solemnly affirm that- 1. That, I will be preferring an Appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata; 2 ITA No. 494/Kol/2025 Bhawna 2. That the Appeal is for Assessment Year 2017-18and the Appeal is against an order passed under section 250 of the Act, by the CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi dated 13th January, 2024. 3. That, there has been a delay of 349 days in filing of the Appeal before the ng Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata; The reasons for delay in filing of the Appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata are mentioned below- a) I came to know about the order passed by the CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi dated 21\" October, 2024 only in the last week of February and immediately contacted a Chartered Accountant, who advised me to file the Appeal before the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, b) On the advise of the new Chartered Accountant, I have got the Appeal drafted, paid the Appeal fee and now filing the Appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, It is humbly submitted that this Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, at Kolkata, on scrutinising the facts and circumstances in the accompanying application, may please construe facts and circumstances as \"sufficient cause\" for condoning the delay in filing of the Appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata The facts and circumstances elucidated in the accompanying application involves the question of \"substantial justice\", where gross delay of 349 days, deserves to be condoned in the overall interest of justice. On the other hand if condoning the delay is being denied it would seriously undermine the cause of justice, resulting into miscarriage of justice for the appellant. VERIFICATION 1. Bhawna W/O- Nitesh Kumar, residing at Lokenath Para, Ward no. 09 P.O+P.S- Dalkhola, Dist.- Uttar dinajpur. West Bengal. 733201 being the Appellant do hereby verify that the contents of the above paragraphs are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and belief, Affirmed at Islampur this 28 day of February, 2025.” Affidavit 2 “I Subarna Roy, son of Late Subal Chandra Roy, aged 26, of Village Uttar hola, Ward no. 15. Dist Uttar Dinajpur, by profession Advocate, having PAN WIPR8704Rdo hereby solemnly declare and affirm as follows: 1. That I was to engaged to file the income tax appeals before the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), against the assessment order passed in the case of BHAWNA (AJAPB4693H) for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. That being an elderly professional, I have assigned the task to my junior advocate. Unfortunately, the junior advocate left the service abruptly without a proper handover, which left the matter unattended. 3. That as a result of above, I could not file the appeal in time before the Hon'ble CIT(Appeals) and there was delay in filing of this appeal. 4. That the delay in filing of appeal was not due to any malafide intention but due to the above stated reason. 3 ITA No. 494/Kol/2025 Bhawna 5. That whatever is declared herein above is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Solemnly declared and affirmed by the declarant Subarna Roy on this 21 day of February, 2025 at Islampur.” It is clear that the assesse’s appeal was delayed on account of the negligence by the tax consultant. After perusal of the two affidavits, we hereby condone the delay and admit this appeal for adjudication. 2. The present appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order dated 13.01.2024. 2.1 In this case, the Ld. AO has made an addition u/s 69A of the Act at Rs. 5,27,30,980/- and estimated profits from business @ 1.55% of the gross receipts at Rs. 31,72,470/-. 2.2 However, before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee did not comply with the notices issued from his office fixing the dates for hearing. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Ld. AO. 3. Before us, the Ld. AR pointed out that due to laxity on the part of the tax consultant the assessee has suffered for lack of persuasion before the authorities below. In light of this fact the Ld. AR has prayed for an opportunity to present the case before the Ld. CIT(A). 3.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below. 4. We have carefully considered the arguments of Ld. AR/DR and have also gone through the orders of authorities below. We feel that in the interests of substantive justice, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and this matter deserves to be remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Needless to say, the assessee would do well to present the facts before him and in case some new evidence also is required to be filed then it should be done so under the extant Rules and the Ld. CIT(A) would do well to call for a remand report. We direct accordingly. 4 ITA No. 494/Kol/2025 Bhawna 5. In light of the discussion above, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 24.06.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) (Sanjay Awasthi) Vice President Accountant Member Dated: 24.06.2025 AK, Sr. P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Bhawna 2. ITO, Ward-3(1), Malda 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches "