MANASWITA DASGUPTA,BARAKKPORE V. I.T.O.WARD-51(1), KOLKATA

ITA 90/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Manaswita Dasgupta, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2021-22. The appeal was initially time-barred by 166 days due to the sudden demise of her advocate and her own health issues, which prevented her from filing the appeal in a timely manner. The ITAT found merit in her reasons for the delay and condoned it. The primary contention was the ex-parte dismissal of her appeal by the CIT(Appeals) without considering the merits of the case. The ITAT noted that the assessee had not been given adequate opportunity to present her case and thus decided to remit the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 668828 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Source of fund
• Section: 142(1); 133(6)

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 90/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2021-2022) Manaswita Dasgupta 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 90/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-2022 Manaswita Dasgupta,…………….….………Appellant 482/C, Anandmath, ‘C’ Block, Ichapur, Nawabgunj, S.O. Barrakpore, North 24-Parganas-743144, W.B., [PAN:BPUPD5881C] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….…….Respondent Ward-51(1), Kolkata, Uttarapan Complex, Ultadanga, Maniktala Civil Centre, Kolkata-700054 Appearances by: Shri Somnath Bera, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, JCIT, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: June 24, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: June 26, 2025 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), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 29th May 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2021-22. ITA No. 90/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2021-2022) Manaswita Dasgupta 2 2. The appeal is time barred by 166 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the assessee filed an Affidavit for condonation of delay in filing appeal stating that due to sudden demise of her Advocate on 11.09.2024, she did not get the certain signed documents and was unable to attend to the compliance for filing of appeal before the Tribunal. When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) without considering the merit of the case, the assessee approached another ld. A.R. to prefer appeal, due to that there was a delay of 166 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, I am inclined to condone the delay of 166 days. Hence the delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who filed her original return of income for AY 2021-22 on 24.01.2022 declaring total income of Rs.10,79,570/-. During the assessment proceedings, notices under section 142(1) of the Act dated 20.07.2022 and 15.09.2022 were issued to the assessee along with questionnaire calling for details of sources of income, sale or purchase of properties during the year under consideration, details of cash deposits and sources for the same along with documentary proof. but the assessee did not provide the details necessary for ongoing assessment proceedings. The assessee also did not respond to the show cause notice issued by the ld. ITA No. 90/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2021-2022) Manaswita Dasgupta 3 Assessing Officer. Subsequently notice issued to the Stata Bank of India on 29.11.2022 under section 133(6) calling for details of cash deposits during the FY 2020-21 but no reply was received. Further notices issued to Bandhan Bank Ltd. on 18.11.2022 and 30.11.2022 and in response to that, Bandhan Bank produced the copy of bank statements. The assessee requested various times to furnish along with documentary proof for the details called for, but no details was furnished by the assessee. Finally, ld. Assessing Officer determined the assessed taxable income of the assessee at Rs.2,41,06,720/-. Being not satisfied, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 5. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate her claim, but the appellant neither filed the written submission nor represented the case before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on 29th May, 2024 without condoning the delay. 6. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. 7. I have heard both the sides. The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without condoning the delay in filing appeal before him. He further submitted that the assessee was not aware of the date of hearing before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as she was suffering from medical problem and there was a surgery which led to non-concentration on all financial matters which requires ITA No. 90/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2021-2022) Manaswita Dasgupta 4 proper mental faculty. Therefore, the assessee was not in a position to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without condoning the delay saying that the assessee is thoroughly negligent in prosecuting her case. 8. At the outset, ld. D.R. brought to our notice that the assessee did not produce the relevant documents as asked by the ld. Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order assessing the taxable income at Rs.2,41,06,720/-. Thereafter the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given many opportunities to the assessee and the assessee neither filed written submission nor any evidence before the ld. CIT(Appeals). He further submitted that before the ITAT, the assessee did not substantiate her claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the CIT(Appeals). 9. I have perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more 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(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and ITA No. 90/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2021-2022) Manaswita Dasgupta 5 merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/06/2025. Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 26th day of June, 2025 Copies to :(1) Manaswita Dasgupta, 482/C, Anandmath, ‘C’ Block, Ichapur, Nawabgunj, S.O. Barrakpore, North 24-Parganas-743144, W.B. (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-51(1), Kolkata, Uttarapan Complex, Ultadanga, Maniktala Civil Centre, Kolkata-700054 (3) CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi; (4) CIT - , Kolkata; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. "