"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'बी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री जॉजज माथान, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राक ेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1063/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jogmaya Construction Company Vs. Income Tax Officer (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAHFJ2940D Appearances: Assessee represented by : None. Department represented by : Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 18-June-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 25-June-2025 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2018-19 dated 13.02.2025, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. Page | 2 I.T.A. No.: 1063/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jogmaya Construction Company. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 25.03.2024. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, therefore, the appeal was heard with the assistance of the Ld. DR. 1.1. The Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 16 days. At the time of hearing, Ld. DR stated that the appeal is defective as the appeal is not signed by the appellant. Further no application seeking condonation of delay has been filed and, therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed on account of delay alone. As no application seeking condonation of delay has been filed, the appeal is hereby dismissed on account of delay. 2. Further, even on merits the assessee has no case. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1) That the Ld. CIT(A) had wrongly drafted the order by making addition of Purchase even though corresponding sales against respective purchases are accepted. 2) That the Ld. CIT(A) had made wrong addition of Purchase in the order even though the accepted the gross profit i.e. difference of sales and purchases 3) That an opportunity may be provided to produce the documents to proof the genuineness of purchases even though all the vendors have more than 10 years of association with me. 4) For that the appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that return showing income of ₹18,57,810/- was filed and on the basis of information received from credible sources the assessment was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and order u/s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act was passed assessing the total income at ₹78,68,412/- after making additions on account of bogus Page | 3 I.T.A. No.: 1063/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jogmaya Construction Company. purchases of ₹57,24,383/- and estimation of 5% of commission of accommodation entries of ₹ 2,86,219/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued a notice to the assessee requiring to file a reply. The assessee did not file any reply and in the grounds of appeal had requested that an opportunity may be provided to produce the documents to prove the genuineness of the purchases even though all the vendors have more than 10 years of association with the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) held in para 5 that since the assessee was unresponsive to various opportunities afforded by the Revenue during the course of assessment proceeding and is now seeking another opportunity to enable it to render its say, in the interest justice and as demanded by the majesty of law the entire matter was restored to the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment in accordance with law. 4. The Ld. DR drew our attention to the fact that the appeal is defective as the grounds do not emanate from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) as the Ld. CIT(A) has not confirmed any addition but has merely remanded the assessment order back to the Ld. AO to make it de novo. 5. We have considered the submission made with effect from 01.10.2024 as per the proviso to clause (a) of subsection (1) to section 251 of the Act, where the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) is against an order of assessment made u/s 144 of the Act, he may set aside the assessment order and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment. Thus, the direction of the Ld. CIT(A) requiring the Ld. AO to make a fresh assessment are in Page | 4 I.T.A. No.: 1063/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jogmaya Construction Company. accordance with law and no interference is called for and all the grounds of appeal are hereby dismissed. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed both on account of delay as well as on merits. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25th June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [George Mathan] [Rakesh Mishra] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 25.06.2025 Bidhan (P.S.) Page | 5 I.T.A. No.: 1063/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jogmaya Construction Company. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Jogmaya Construction Company, 20C Kenderdine Lane 1st Floor Goda Niwas, Kolkata, West Bengal, 700012. 2. Income Tax Officer. 3. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. 6. Guard File. //True copy // By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata "