NARAYAN DALMIA,BANKURA V. ITO, WARD 3(1), BANKURA

ITA 1121/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Narayan Dalmia, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2018-2019. The primary contention arose from the addition of undisclosed income amounting to Rs. 14,50,666, which was considered by the Assessing Officer following a survey under section 133A of the Income Tax Act. The appellant had initially declared a total income of Rs. 20,60,150 and had committed to pay an advance tax of Rs. 8,00,000 on additional income during the survey. The Assessing Officer added the undisclosed income to the total income of the assessee and initiated penalty proceedings under section 270A. The CIT(Appeals) upheld the addition, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 784937 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 2; 133A

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 1121/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Narayan Dalmia 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 1121/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Narayan Dalmia,……….………….………...……Appellant Saluni, Jhantipahari, Bankura-722137, West Bengal [PAN:ACZPD3128P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-3(1), Bankura, Aayakar Bhawan, Chandmari Danga, Bankura-722101, West Bengal Appearances by: Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Manas Mondal, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: November 11, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: November 12, 2025 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 17.03.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Facts in brief are that the appellant-assessee filed his return of income on 06.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs.20,60,150/- . The case was selected under ‘Compulsory criteria’ and notice Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1121/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Narayan Dalmia 2 under section 143(2) of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. Survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted in the office of Narayan Dalmia, Prop. Of M/s. Jai Narayan Industries, Vill. Saluni, Bankura on 23.03.2018. During the course of survey, the assessee committed to pay advance tax of Rs.8,00,000/- on additional income instead of hi regular income. The assessee has paid taxes of Rs.7,80,000/- only out of which claim refund of Rs.3,64,800/-. The assessee is engaged in milling of wheat supplied by Food Corporation of India and convert the same into Atta. The major source of revenue is from milling charges received from the Government. The other business activity includes sale of Bhusi, which is a by-product of wheat crushing. During the course of assessment proceeding vide notice under section 142(1), the assessee was asked to furnish the details of disclosed income corresponding to tax of Rs.4,35,200/- which comes to Rs.14,50,666/-. In response to the notice, the explanation offered by the assessee is not acceptable by the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer considered the income of Rs.14,50,666/- resulting into addition tax of Rs.4,35,200/- determined at the time of survey as undisclosed income and added to the total income of the assessee and penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act were initiated separately. The ld. Assessing Officer assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.35,10,815/-. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee saying that the appellant completely failed to submit Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1121/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Narayan Dalmia 3 supporting documents either during the assessment proceedings or during the appellate proceedings. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that he has submitted all the details, i.e. stock register and all other relevant documents, but the ld. Assessing Officer only relied on the statement of the assessee, i.e. advance tax during 133A proceedings, wherein it was mentioned that “do you want to add or alter/modify anything of your statement as recorded above”. However, I am committing to pay Rs.8,00,000/- as advance tax for AY 2018-19 on or before 31st March,2018. He further submitted that the assessee has filed return of income according to the books of income and showed all the registers, therefore, there is no question of payment of advance tax but when the assessee claimed for refund, then the ld. Assessing Officer made the addition without any basis. Ld. CIT(Appeals) also confirmed the addition without considering the materials available on record. He, therefore, pleaded to set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities. 5. On the other hand, it was the submission of the ld. Departmental Representative that the assessee has not furnished any stock register, sales register etc. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer has left no other option but to make the addition and the assessee also got committed the advance tax of Rs.8,00,000/-. Therefore, the ld. D.R. pleaded before the Bench to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1121/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Narayan Dalmia 4 6. I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. There is no dispute regarding the statement made by the assessee during 133A proceedings about the advance tax. However, the assessee has filed the return of income and he has not paid the advance tax as admitted. It is also an admitted fact that there was no incriminating material was found except the difference of stock and the assessee also categorically said that due to absence of the accountant, stock register was not updated and thereafter he has recorded all the stocks and filed the return of income. However, the assessee has not placed stock register etc. before the Tribunal. Therefore, I am of the view that it is a fit case to remit the matter back to the file of ld. Assessing Officer to examine this issue afresh after providing 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 and to file all the details before the Ld. Assessing Officer failing which the Ld. Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits of the case, based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12/11/2025. Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 12th day of November, 2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1121/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Narayan Dalmia 5 Copies to :(1) Narayan Dalmia, Saluni, Jhantipahari, Bankura-722137, West Bengal (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bankura, Aayakar Bhawan, Chandmari Danga, Bankura-722101, West Bengal (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 Printed from counselvise.com "