DURGA PROPERTIES,KOLKATA V. I.T.O., WARD - 46(3), KOLKATA

ITA 1119/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Durga Properties, which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)), which had dismissed their appeal ex parte due to non-compliance. The original dispute arose when the Assessing Officer (AO) treated a cash deposit of Rs. 87,03,000 in the assessee's bank account as undisclosed income, adding it to the assessee's income for the assessment year 2012-13. The ITAT found that the CIT(A)'s order was passed without considering the merits of the case, as the assessee had not complied with the notices, leading to an ex parte decision. The ITAT did not object to remitting the appeal back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 782223 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 4 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: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 147

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.1119/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Durga Properties………………………………………………….…….……Appellant 29D, Bentick Street, Unit-A,B&C, 3rd Floor, Kol- 1. [PAN: AAFFD5645P] vs. ITO, Ward-46(3), Kolkata..………………………..………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Ankit Jalan, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : October 15, 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 30.04.25 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘CIT(A)’] passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2012–13. 2. Brief facts of the case are that in this case, the return of income for the year under consideration was filed declaring a total income of Rs.23,510/-. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee deposited cash amounting to Rs.87,03,000/- in its bank account during the F.Y 2011-12. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was processed u/s 143(1) and thereafter, reopened u/s 147 of the Act. Due to failure to file any documentary evidence by the assessee regarding the said cash deposits in bank, the Assessing Officer held the said cash deposits of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1119/Kol/2025 Durga Properties 2 Rs.87,03,000/- as undisclosed income of the assessee and added the same to the income of the assessee. 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.1119/Kol/2025 Durga Properties 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 "