MR. ABU ZAFAR MONDAL,BISHNUPUR V. ITO, WARD 25(1), KOLKATA

ITA 1903/KOL/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Mr. Abu Zafar Mondal against the orders of the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed additions to his income for the assessment year 2017-18. The additions included Rs. 12,08,000 under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for unexplained accumulation from agricultural operations, and Rs. 2,29,967 for undisclosed interest income. The ITAT found that the assessee had not adequately presented his case at the lower levels and allowed a remand to the AO for a thorough examination of the new evidence and proper consideration of deductions related to the interest income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785639 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1903/Kol/2025 Assessment Year 2017-18 Mr. Abu Zafar Mondal, Gaddaria, Dosotina, P.S., Bishnupur, South 24 Parganas - 743503 [PAN: CNMPM1487J] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 25(1), Kolkata, 2, Gariahat Road (South), 4th Floor, Kolkata - 700068 ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : B.B. Payra, Adv. Department represented by : Saumitra Ghosh, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : 27.10.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 27.10.2025 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. In this case, the Ld. AR moved an application dated 24.10.2025 through which it was mentioned that due to an oversight the PAN mentioned was “AFOPG4766L” in place of correct PAN being “CNMPM1487J”. It was requested that the correct PAN may be mentioned in the body of this order. We take note accordingly. 2. This appeal arises from order dated 20.06.2025, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”). 2.1 Brief facts are that in this case, the Ld. AO passed an exparte order through which an addition of Rs. 12,08,000/- u/s 69A of the Act was made on account of alleged unexplained accumulation from agricultural Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1903/Kol/2025 Mr. Abu Zafar Mondal operations. A further addition of Rs. 2,29,967/- was also made on account of undisclosed interest income. 2.2 The assessee carried this matter in appeal, where also he could not succeed. Regarding the addition u/s 69A of the Act, it was held that the assessee has not been able to file any corroborative evidence to show that there could be accumulation from agricultural income. Regarding the second addition, the Ld. CIT(A) did not believe the assessee and stated that the impugned amount was justifiably brought to tax by the Ld. AO. 2.3 Further aggrieved, the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. C.I.T (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.12,08,000/-made by the A.O. u/s.69A of the Act being the amount of deposits made by the Appellant to his Bank Accounts during the demonetization period, which represented the accumulated sales proceeds of Agricultural income of past several years. 2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. C.I.T (A) was right in confirming the addition of Rs.2,29,967/- being the aggregate amount of S.B. Interest of Rs.15,034/- and N.S.C & T.D. Interest of Rs.2,14,933/-from Postal A/cs. But at the same time directions should have given for allowing necessary Deductions as applicable under Chapter VI-A of the I.T. Act, 1961, such directions has not been given by the Ld. CIT (A) in his Appellate Order. 3. That the Appellant craves leave to submit further grounds or alter, amend or modify the grounds already taken before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal.” 3. Before us, the Ld. AR pleaded that they had considerable number of documents to show that the agricultural operations have been carried out in the past and because of that there was accumulation of funds which were eventually the matter of adverse consideration by the Ld. AO. The Ld. AR wanted to submit copies of documents, amounting to fresh evidence, before the ITAT. Further, since these documents were not accompanied by any applications under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, hence the Bench declined to entertain such documents at this stage. Regarding interest income, the Ld. AR fairly stated that their only prayer was to allow expenses/deductions as would be admissible under law. The Ld. AR Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1903/Kol/2025 Mr. Abu Zafar Mondal pointed out the specific prayer contained in Ground No. 2. 3.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below. 4. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. It is clear that the assessee could not present the facts before the Ld. AO and it seems due to ignorance of procedure and law evidence for agricultural income was attempted to be produced before the Ld. CIT(A), probably without any application under Rule 46A of the IT Rules. Needless to say, the assessee could not succeed at first appeal appellate stage. On consideration of the totality of facts and circumstances of this case, it is felt that in the interests of substantive justice, the assessee deserves a chance to prove his bonafides before the Ld. AO. Furthermore, since the assessee has agreed to the addition of income from interest and has merely prayed that deductions may be allowed as per law, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. AO with following directions: (a) The assessee would present all documentary evidences available with him to attempt justifying agricultural operations and also the accumulation of funds as a result of that. The Ld. AO would be free to carry out any investigation or enquiry as deemed fit in this regard. (b) The Ld. AO would consider allowing any justified expenses, as per law, for earning the said interest income and would also allow any deduction that would be due to the assessee. 4. In result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 27.10.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma) (Sanjay Awasthi) Judicial Member Accountant Member Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 1903/Kol/2025 Mr. Abu Zafar Mondal Dated: 27.10.2025 AK, Sr. P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "