Sri Mohan Chandra Mondal, Paschim Medinipur V. I.T.O.,Ward-1(3), Midnapore

ITA 231/KOL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5604 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 143(1); 143(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘A(SMC)’ AT KOLKATA [BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER] I.T.A. No. 231/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sri Mohan Chandra Mondal....................................................................................................Appellant Chandrakona Road, Satbankura, Garhbeta, Paschim Medinipur – 721258. [PAN: ALIPM 9145 P] Vs ITO, Ward-1(3), Midnapore............................................................................................Respondent Appearances by: None appearing on behalf of the Assessee Shri B.S. Anand, JCIT, Sr. DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue: Date of concluding the hearing : April 28, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : June 13 th , 2022 ORDER PER SONJOY SARMA, JM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the assessment year (in short ‘A.Y.’) 2011-12 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-11, Kolkata dated 07.08.2019 which is arising out of the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(in short ‘the Act’) dated 21.03.2014 passed by the ITO, Ward-1(3), Midnapore. 2. At the time of hearing the registry has informed that the present appeal is time barred by16 days. The assessee prayed for condonation of the delay by submitting the affidavit which is placed on record. We after perusing the affidavit as well as material available on record we find that merit in the contention of the affidavit given by the assessee and keeping the larger interest of justice, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2 I.T.A. No. 231/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sri Mohan Chandra Mondal 3. After going through the order sheet, it reflected that the matter has been posted for quite some time and it is an old appeal pending for two years and it is unrepresented by the AR of the assessee or any counsel or authorised representative and the record further shows that 2 nd February, 2022, 14 th March, 2022 and 28 th April, 2022 also none appeared on behalf of the assessee. As such, we have no other alternative but to hear the matter ex-parte with the assistance of ld. DR. 4. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: “i. For that the addition of Rs. 3,35,200/- for unexplained sources was not justified. ii. For that the ITO erred in adding Rs. 53,581/- for undisclosed sale was not justified. iii. For that the ITO erred in adding Rs. 50,288/- was not according to law. iv. For that the addition of Rs. 6,00,000/- and not according to law. v. For that the ITO was wrong in calculated Rs. 6,48,345/- as Long Term Capital Gain and added with total income was unjustified. vi. For that the ITO was unjustified in calculating undisclosed profit of Rs. 1,65,853/-. vii. For that the ITO had added Rs. 6,00,000/- for unexplained investment and the same was not proper. viii. For that the ITO was not justified in adding Rs. 5,66,946/- as undisclosed investment and the same was illegal.” 3 I.T.A. No. 231/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sri Mohan Chandra Mondal 5. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee filed its return dated 01.10.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 2,25,830/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As per Audit Report submitted by the assessee it reveals that the assessee was engaged in trading of cement & potato during the assessment year in question. The case of the assessee was selected through computer aided scrutiny selection (CASS) and on the basis of reason examined the source of cash deposits in saving bank accounts as per AIR information and for this purpose statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax was issued on 06.08.2012 which was duly served upon the assessee. Further the notice u/s 142(1) dated 27.06.2013, 13.12.2013 & 21.01.2014 were served upon the assessee to furnish certain details in connection to scrutiny proceeding. The assessee has been given ten consecutive opportunities to furnish required details in spite of that assessee has failed to furnish the details as asked for. The penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act has been imposed upon the assessee levying penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on 04.12.2013 also. Ultimately, the AR of the assessee appeared and filed his power of Attorney and certain details which has been verified on test check basis by the AO from various parties. The AO found discrepancy in books of accounts and following additions were made: “Sales incentive not taken as income Rs. 3,35,200/- Undisclosed Gross Profit on cement Rs. 26,302/- Security Deposit Rs. 53,581/- Interest on Security deposit Rs. 4,285/- Gross Profit on sale of TMT Bars Rs. 50,288/- Credit Note Rs.23,579/- 4 I.T.A. No. 231/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sri Mohan Chandra Mondal Bogus Sundry Creditors Rs. 6,00,000/- Unexplained long term capital gain Rs. 6,48,346/- Gross Profit on undisclosed sale Rs. 1,65,853/- Undisclosed deposit in bank SB A/c Rs. 70,189/- Gross Profit undisclosed sale Rs. 19,812/- Undisclosed balance lying in Bank a/c(s) Rs. 15,696/- Undisclosed balance lying in Bank a/c(s) Rs. 10,976/- Undisclosed investment in ICICI prudential a/c wi th undisclosed sources Gross profit on undisclosed sale Rs. 51,842/- Undisclosed Bank a/c closing balance Rs. 8,511/- Unexplained bank transaction Rs. 56,100/- Unexplained investment Rs. 50,000/- Unexplained investment Rs. 5,66,946/- Gross profit on undisclosed gross receipts Rs. 2,073/- Gross profit on undisclosed gross receipts Rs. 4,756/- Gross profit on undisclosed gross receipts Rs. 10,875/- Undisclosed bank deposit Rs. 4,083/-‘’ Accordingly income of the assessee recomputed and assessed by the AO at Rs. 36,09,973/- and penalty notice u/s 271 of the Income Tax Act was issued upon the assessee. 6. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) which was dismissed 07.08.2019. 7. After going through the facts and circumstances of the case and material available on record, we find that the assessee never disclosed the aforesaid transaction in his return of income, although the ld. AO provided him several opportunities to explain the fact but the assessee could not provide proper reply to the show cause notice except in few instances he submits that due to mistake he could not show 5 I.T.A. No. 231/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sri Mohan Chandra Mondal the such transaction in his return of income and admitted the facts that the transactions had taken place and even before the ld. CIT(A) assessee could rebut the same. In the instant appeal also, the assessee is not able to demonstrate any new facts regarding non-inclusion of such transaction in his return of income as such we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 13 th June, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (SONJOY SARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: /06/2022 Biswajit, Sr. PS Copy of order forwarded to: 1. Appellant: Sri Mohan Chandra Mondal. 2. Respondent: ITO, Ward-1(3), Midnapore. 3. The CIT(A) 4. The CIT 5. DR True Copy, By order, Assistant Registrar ITAT Kolkata Benches, Kolkata