HIMANSU SEKHAR SENAPATI,KOLKATA V. ITO, WARD-22(4), KOLKATA

ITA 122/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Himansu Sekhar Senapati appealing against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC Delhi, which confirmed the Assessing Officer's additions of unconfirmed cash receipts and unreconciled cash deposits for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The assessee argued that these additions were made without providing a reasonable opportunity to submit confirmations and that the CIT(A) erred in law by dismissing the appeal without proper notice. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request for a fresh hearing and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711916 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SOMNATH DAS BISWAS
• Assessee Lawyers: PALLASH CHATTOPADHYAY
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘एसएमसी’ न्यायपीठ,कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.122/KOL/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/s Himansu Sekhar Senapati 24, NS Road, 5th Floor, Kolkata- 700001, West Bengal Vs ITO, Ward 22(4), Kolkata 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700016, West Bengal PAN No. :ALPPS 7769 G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Pallash Chattopadhyay, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC Delhi dated 19.09.2024 passed for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. At the outset, on perusal of the appeal record, I find that the appeal of the assessee is filed belatedly by 46 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating reasons for delay in filing the appeal due to lack of knowledge in passing of the order by the ld. CIT(A), which caused the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal within the stipulated period. Ld. Sr. DR also did not raise any objection to condone the delay. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the contentions made by the assessee in the affidavit, I condone the delay of 46 days in filing the present appeal and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 122/KOL/2025 2 3. The assessee in its appeal has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC is wrong, unjust and has erred in law in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer in holding the Addition as Unconfirmed Cash Receipts from 11 Clients amounting to 8,85,758 for e-payment of Tax without providing reasonable and sufficient opportunity to submit the confirmation before the Ld. AO and CIT(A)/NFAC. The Appellant prays to accepts evidence in form of Confirmation from 11 Clients amounting to Rs. 8,85,758/- for e-payment of Tax which was submitted before Ld. CIT(A)-6, Kolkata and ITO Ward 22(4), Kolkata against remand report proceeding and may kindly be deleted the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC is also wrong and has erred in law in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer in holding the Addition as Un reconciled Cash deposits without considering the facts and submission of the Appellant as regards Un reconciled Cash deposits was from the cash withdrawn from Credit Cards, Cash received against Profession Fees and Agricultural Income. The Appellant prays that addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer may kindly be deleted. 3. The Ld CIT(A)-NFAC erred in coming to the conclusion in his order u/s.250 dated 19/09/2024 that the Appellant was not interested in pursuing its appeal at a time when it is clear that the Appellant was not aware of the fact that the hearing notice had been served to his old email id which was not operated from a few years back, whereas he had mentioned the address in form 35 to send notice for hearing u/s 250 and passed an order on that date without giving further opportunity of being heard..” 4. The above grounds have been raised by the assessee in Form 36 filed before the Tribunal. A bare perusal of ground No.3, shows that the assessee has requested to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh in the back ground of when the appellant was not aware of the fact that the notice has been served to his old email ID and passed an order on that date without giving further opportunity of being heard. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 122/KOL/2025 3 5. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee reiterated his submission as were made before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. It is not a fact that the assessee was unaware of the passing of the order by the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the ld. Sr. DR requested to uphold the orders of the authorities below. 6. After considering the submissions of the parties and perusing the material available on record along with the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in Form 35, it is clear that the assessee has sought an opportunity to represent his case before the ld. CIT(A). Further a perusal of the impugned order at para 5, it is also clear that the assessee was non-cooperative before the ld. CIT(A), resulting into dismissal of the appeal by the ld. CIT(A). Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and as the assessee failed to submit any documentary evidence in regard to its claim before the ld. CIT(A), I am of the view that it is a fit case to remit the matter back on this issue to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudication the issue afresh. Accordingly, the matter is remitted back on this issue to the file of ld. CIT(A) with a direction to dispose off the above issue of the assessee on merits after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), failing which the ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 122/KOL/2025 4 on record. Thus, this ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22/07/2025. Sd/- (DUVVURU RL REDDY) उपाध्यक्ष / VICE PRESIDENT कोलकाता/Kolkata, दिनाांक Dated 22/07/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कोलकाता /ITAT, Kolkata 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "