Goldline Dealers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata V. I.T.O., Ward - 9(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 483/KOL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Goldline Dealers Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an addition of Rs.5,88,50,000/- to their income, which was alleged to be received as an accommodation entry from M/s Lakshya Merchants Pvt. Ltd. The original assessment declared an income of Rs.4,70,26,000/- against nil income reported by the assessee. Following information from the investigation wing, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment, leading to the addition. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition, which was challenged by the appellant on grounds of lack of opportunity to present their case during the COVID-19 pandemic and the absence of any transaction with the alleged company.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 128260 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘बी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Įी संजय गग[, ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सदèय के सम¢ Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A No.483/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2012-13 Goldline Dealers Pvt. Ltd............................................................Appellant 5/1, Clive Row, 4 th Floor, Kolkata-1. [PAN: AAECG0745M] vs. ITO, Ward-9(2), Kolkata..........................................................Respondent Appearances by: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 10, 2023 Date of pronouncing the order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग[, ÛयाǓयक सदèय ɮवारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.06.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The assessee in this appeal has agitated against the addition of Rs.5,88,50,000/-, allegedly received by the assessee by way of accommodation entry provided by M/s Lakshya Merchants Pvt. Ltd. 3. In this case, the original assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed on 23.03.2015 assessing the income of Rs.4,70,26,000/- as against the nil income shown by the assessee. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer I.T.A No.483/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2012-13 Goldline Dealers Pvt. Ltd 2 reopened the assessment on the information of the investigation wing that the assessee had received accommodation entry from M/s Lakshya Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Since, the assessee did not submit the necessary explanations/documents in this regard, the Assessing Officer held that the income of the assessee to the tune of Rs.5,88,50,000/- has escaped assessment. He accordingly made the impugned addition which was confirmed by the CIT(A). 4. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order of the CIT(A) to submit that the said order was passed by the CIT(A) ex parte of the assessee on 29.06.2022. The ld. counsel has further invited our attention to the various dates fixed by the CIT(A) to submit that the CIT(A) had fixed the date of hearings during the period of Covid-19 pandemic and the assessee could not furnish his reply/explanations during the said period. The ld. counsel has submitted in fact the assessee has not done any transaction with M/s Lakshya Merchants Pvt. Ltd. as alleged nor received any alleged sum of Rs.5,88,50,000/- and therefore there is no justification on the part of the lower authorities in making the impugned addition. The ld. counsel, therefore, has requested that the matter be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification of the aforesaid fact. 5. Considering the above submissions, we accordingly set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to verify the aforesaid contention of the assessee and thereafter to pass a fresh assessment order in accordance with law. Needless to say that CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the assessee to present its case. I.T.A No.483/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2012-13 Goldline Dealers Pvt. Ltd 3 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 27 th June, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- [डॉÈटर मनीष बोरड /Dr. Manish Borad] [संजय गग[ /Sanjay Garg] लेखा सदèय /Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय /Judicial Member Dated: 27.06.2023. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Goldline Dealers Pvt. Ltd 2. ITO, Ward-9(2), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches