HAMIDA KHATOON,KOLKATA V. DY.CIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

ITA 353/CTK/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Hamida Khatoon, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A), Bhubaneswar, concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention in the appeal was the claim that no search had occurred in the assessee's case, which was crucial for contesting the assessment order. However, the Tribunal noted that a search had indeed occurred, as evidenced by the Panchanama document, and the assessee's name was listed under 'Warrant'. The Tribunal also observed that the assessee had not denied the address mentioned in the Panchanama and had accepted the assessment order by filing a return of income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25948 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 28-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL Hamida Khatoon, 38, Circus Avenue, 2nd floor, Kolkata 700017 PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an CIT(A), Bhubaneswar 1/10396/2018-19 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee. However, a submission has been sent by the assessee, which reads as follows: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.353/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Hamida Khatoon, 38, Circus floor, Kolkata- Vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar No.AFVPK 8893 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : None(Written submission) Revenue by : None (Adjournment petition) Date of Hearing : 28/10/20 Date of Pronouncement : 28/10/20 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ord CIT(A), Bhubaneswar-2, dated 7.8.2024 in Appeal No. CIT(A),Bhubaneswar 19 for the assessment year 2017-18. None represented on behalf of the assessee. However, a has been sent by the assessee, which reads as follows: P a g e 1 | 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 2(1), Respondent) : None(Written submission) : None (Adjournment petition) 2024 024 appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A),Bhubaneswar- None represented on behalf of the assessee. However, a written has been sent by the assessee, which reads as follows: ITA No.353/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 P a g e 2 | 5 “ ITA No.353/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 P a g e 3 | 5 3. Ld CIT DR has filed adjournment letter, which reads as follows: “ 4. As the issue in this appeal is simple and do not require further clarification, the appeal is being disposed off on merits after considering the written submission filed by the assessee. 5. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee is an individual, who is a partner in M/s. Serajuddin and Co. A perusal of the Panchanama as has been enclosed with the written submission of the assessee clearly shows the assessee’s name in ‘Warrant”. Therefore, this claim of the assessee that there was no search in the case of ITA No.353/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 P a g e 4 | 5 the assessee no more survives. It might be true that the assessee is staying at Kolkata and search has taken place at Bhubaneswar. It might be true that the search at the assessee’s residence premises at Kolkata had not been done. In any case, the Panchanama does not mention the address of the assessee at Kolkata. It is also noticed that the assessee has not denied the address mentioned in the Panchanama at Bhubaneswar. Thus, it cannot be said that there was no search in the case of the assessee. The search has only taken place on 21.12.2016 and the assessment year 2017- 18 is the unabated year. The assessment order has been passed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2018. The assessee has also filed her return of income and the assessment has been accepted accepting the return of income. This being so, we are of the view that the order passed by the ld CIT(A) dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the appeal has been filed on a technical ground which has not been substantiated by any evidence by the appellant, is found to be right. In these circumstances, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 6.. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 28/10/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 28/10/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) ITA No.353/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 P a g e 5 | 5 Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.Secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Hamida Khatoon, 38, Circus Avenue, 2nd floor, Kolkata-700017 2. The Respondent: DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar 3. The CIT(A)-, Bhubaneswar-2 4. Pr.CIT, Bhubaneswar-2 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// "