JASMINE COMMOTRADE PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA V. ITO, WARD 9(3), , KOLKATA

ITA 1089/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Jasmine Commotrade Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2012-2013. The primary issue was the addition of Rs. 1,40,00,000 under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, concerning share application money, which the AO added due to the assessee's failure to prove the identity of the creditors. The assessee argued that the money was received in the preceding year, not the assessment year in question, and thus should not have been added in the current assessment year. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument and restored the matter to the AO to verify the year of receipt of the funds.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 653122 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANU BISWAS
• Assessee Lawyers: MIRAJ D SHAH

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.1089/KOL/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year. : 2012-2013) Jasmine Commotrade Pvt. Ltd. 1447/1, Madurdaha Road, West Bengal Vs ITO Ward-9(3), Kolkata PAN No. :AACCJ 0563 G (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Miraj D Shah, AR रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms. Ranu Biswas, Addl.CIT-Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 18/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, JM : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 23.05.2023, passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for A.Y.2012-2013. 2. Shri Miraj D. Shah, ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Ms. Ranu Biswas, ld. Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. At the outset, we find that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 666 days. In this regard the assessee has sworn in affidavit that due to lack of knowledge about the passing of the appellate order for which the assessee could not file the appeal before the Tribunal within the stipulated time. This contention of the assessee is plausible and not found to be false. Accordingly, we condone the delay and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. 4. It was submitted by the ld. AR that admittedly the AO had made addition u/s.68 of the Act in respect of share application money received ITA No.1089/Kol/2025 2 to an extent of Rs.1,40,00,000/- because the assessee was unable to prove the identity of the creditors. It was the submission that on appeal before the ld. CIT(A), it was specifically brought to the attention in Form 35 that the money was received in the year preceding to the previous year in the bank of the assessee and consequently no addition in respect of the said share application money could be made during the impugned assessment year. The ld. AR drew our attention to page 4 of the order of the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that admittedly before the ld. CIT(A) there was no compliance. It was the prayer that the issue may be restored to the file of AO to examine as to whether the assessee has received the money during the impugned assessment year or in the earlier assessment year. It was the submission that if the money was not received during the impugned assessment year, no addition could be made in the impugned assessment year. 5. In reply, the ld. Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) wherein he has extracted the statement of facts, clearly shows that the assessee has categorically mentioned that the money has not been received in this year but has been received in the year preceding to the previous year in the bank account of the assessee. This needs to be examined. In these circumstances, the issue in this appeal is restored to the file of the ld.AO for readjudication and for examination as to the year in which the money was received by the assessee and we do so. In ITA No.1089/Kol/2025 3 view of the above, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 18/06/2025. Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनांक Dated 18/06/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 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// "