GOPAL PODDER,BARASAT, NORTH 24 PARGANAS V. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 50(1), KOLKATA

ITA 1796/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Gopal Podder, the appellant, who faced additions to his income under sections 68 and 24(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2017-2018. The additions were made by the Assessing Officer (AO) due to unexplained cash deposits, decline in gross profit, and differences in closing stock values. The assessee failed to respond to notices during the initial assessment and appeal stages, leading to an exparte order by the CIT(A). The ITAT noted the absence of any presentation of facts before the CIT(A) and decided to remand the case for a fresh hearing, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669248 (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: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 68

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. 1796/Kol/2024 (Assessment Year 2017-2018) Gopal Podder, 125, Bhatrapally Nabapally, Barsat-I, North 24 Parganas [PAN: ALQPP7644G] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 50(1), Kolkata, Block DS-2 and 3, Maniktala Civic Centre, Uttarapan, Kol-54 ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : None 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, there is a delay of 220 days which has been requested to be condoned as under: “The assessee is being assessed to Income Tax by the Assessing Officer, Circle 50(1). The assessee have received the assessment order and demand notice for assessment year 2017-18 on 16.11.2023. Being aggrieved by the said order the assessee ought to have filed the appeal on 15.01.2024. However, the assessee could not do so for the following reasons: The assessee was not able to respond to the captioned notices and orders within the stipulated dates as assessee is not highly educated or tech-savvy, have lack of awareness and limited technical knowledge of Income Tax Portal. Due to lack of knowledge he was unable to login the portal and neither had he received the physical copy of Order, hence on non-receipt of physical copy resulted in the delay in responding to notices. 2 ITA No. 1796/Kol/2024 Gopal Podder When assessee came to know about the Order dated 16.11.2023, during that period he underwent a serious medical operation. As he being a heart patient was suffering from blockage in ventricles beginning from the period of June 2023. After feeling heavy pain in the chest, he underwent a medical surgery on 15.09.2023 and was discharged on 17.09.2023 with an advisory from the Doctor that six months complete bed rest required for a speedy recovery, without indulging into any physical activities and stress hindering his health. The stressful situation in the family due to the surgery of the assessee affected his ability to manage tax matters resulting in delay in filing the appeal. The assessee supported his claim by submitting medical certificates and reports as proof of his critical operation. The delay was not intentional or due to negligence but was caused by a genuine health emergency. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was passed on 16/11/2023, and as per the provisions of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the appeal was required to be filed within 60 days, i.e., by 15/01/2024. However, the appeal was actually filed on 22/08/2024, resulting in a delay of 219 days. The delay of 219 days in submission of the appeal having been caused by circumstances entirely beyond the assessee's control, I would request your honor kindly to condone the same and entertain the assessee's appeal on merits. And for this act of kindness, the assessee, as duty bound, shall ever pray.” Considering the reasons given for the said delay, we hereby condone the delay and admit the 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 16.11.2023. 2.1 In this case, the Ld. AO, vide his order dated 02.12.2019 has added amounts u/s 68 of the Act and some amounts on account of enhancing the gross profit and an amount of Rs. 3,654/- was added on account of difference in closing stock values. 2.2 Aggrieved with this action of Ld. AO, the assessee approached the CIT(A) where it is seen that he did not respond to any of the notices issued to him, fixing the case for hearing. The Ld. CIT(A) is seen to have dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 2.3 Aggrieved with this action, the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds: 3 ITA No. 1796/Kol/2024 Gopal Podder “1. Relevant Section 68 Issue Cash deposits in various bank accounts of different nature Ground of Appeal: The Learned AO has erred in the addition of the amount to the total income of the assessee without giving him sufficient appropriate opportunity of being heard. 2. Issue Decline in Gross Profit Ground of Appeal: The Learned AO has erred in the addition of the amount to the total income of the assessee without giving him sufficient appropriate opportunity of being heard. 3 Issue: Difference in Closing Stock Ground of Appeal: The Learned AO has erred in the addition of the amount to the total income of the assessee without giving hum sufficient appropriate opportunity of being heard 4. Relevant Section: Section 24(b) Issue: Non availability of Interest Certificate Ground of Appeal. The Learned AO has erred in the non-claim of deduction of the amount from the total income of the assessee without giving him sufficient appropriate opportunity of being heard. 5. Honorable Commissioner of appeal have not considered the grounds 6. Any other grounds that may be preferred by the assessee during the pendency of this appeal 7. The captioned assessment proceedings were initiated during the foundation stage of implementation of Faceless Assessment, which was genesis for every assessee as well as all professionals. Henceforth it is absolutely unaware by the assessee to communicate pursuant to the notices served by the learned department. And there was no mala fide intention of the assessee to suppress the facts by not responding with the departmental notice. By considering the aforesaid grounds the assessee has prayed before the honorable authority, to re-assess the case or remand back the proceeding to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) for disposal of the case and give opportunity to the aggrieved assessee to produce the appropriate document to suffice the award passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. On the last date of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of Ld. DR. The Ld. DR pointed out that in the absence of any presentation of facts before the Ld. CIT(A), there could not have been any other decision then what was rendered in the impugned order. 4 ITA No. 1796/Kol/2024 Gopal Podder 4. We have carefully considered the documents before us and also the contents of paper book running to 89 pages filed in support of the grounds of appeal. We find that there is a recording by the Ld. CIT(A) on page 3 at para 4 of the impugned order that none of the notices issued for presentation of details by the assessee were availed of by him. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) is seen to have confirmed the additions made by the Ld. AO. We notice that the paper book filed by the assessee is in violation of Rule 18 of ITAT Rules, 1963 since it is not clear whether the documents filed through such paper book were actually before either of the authorities below or they are being filed for the first time before the ITAT. Be that as it may, as has been mentioned earlier, the impugned order is an exparte order considering that there was no submission of facts by the assessee. Accordingly, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving an opportunity of being heard. 5. With these remarks, appeal of the assessee 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. Gopal Podder 2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 50(1), Kolkata 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches "