PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA V. TRINITY VINTRADE PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

ITA 1001/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the revenue against the order of the CIT(A) which had deleted the addition of Rs.8,00,056 made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, treating it as unexplained cash credit. The revenue contended that the CIT(A)'s order was bad in law as the assessee failed to establish the identity, creditworthiness of the transferor company, and the genuineness of the transaction. However, the CIT(A) found that the amount was received in the previous financial year and was merely a settlement of an advance, thus not relating to the assessment year in question. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the revenue's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717485 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1001/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), Kolkata ………………...………………..….……….Appellant vs. Trinity Vintrade Pvt. Ltd.………..........................…….........……...…..…..Respondent 2nd Floor, Room no.22, 22 Canning street, Kol-1. [PAN: AADCT2156P] Appearances by: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, JCIT, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : August 11, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : August 11, 2025 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26.12.2024 for the Assessment Year 2013–14. 2. At the outset, we note that there is a delay of 69 days in filing the present appeal. The revenue has filed a petition for condonation of delay citing reasonable cause for the belated filing. We, after considering the submissions and materials on record, satisfy that the revenue was prevented by reasonable cause in filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Accordingly, the delay is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2013–14 by declaring total income of Rs.70,440/-. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act for the reason that a sum of Rs.8,00,056/- was transferred from one M/s Purayita Vanija Pvt. Ltd. to the assessee’s bank account during the year and found that the alleged Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1001/Kol/2025 Trinity Vintrade Pvt. Ltd 2 company was among the paper/jamakharchi companies. In response to notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee furnished returns and objections of the assessee were recorded. Further notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and the assessee furnished various details and explanation for the source of the amount credited in bank account and ultimately after considering all the documents, the Assessing Officer treated Rs.8,00,056/- u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit and added the same in the hands of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), where the ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Dissatisfied with the above order, the revenue is in appeal before this tribunal stating that order passed by the CIT(A) is bad in law and liable to be set aside as the assessee failed to establish identity and creditworthiness of M/s Purayita Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. and the genuineness of the transaction of Rs.8,00,056/-. 6. On the other hand, the learned AR objected to the above prayer made by the ld. DR stating that the present issue had heard extensively by the ld. CIT(A) during appellate proceedings and the ld. CIT(A) has elaborately discussed the issue in his order and the CIT(A) in his order has clearly stated that the alleged sum of Rs.8,00,056/- was received by the assessee in the previous year i.e. on or before 31.03.2012 and does not relate to the present assessment year in question. Therefore, the reopening of the assessment was bad in law since the issue is not relating to the assessment year in question and in para no.6.3, the ld. CIT(A) has clearly mentioned the said fact which is as under: “6.3 The argument of the appellant is that the amount received only settled an advance that existed in the books at the beginning of the previous year. And that the original advance had been given in a preceding year. The relevant part of the balance sheet is extracted below: As at 31.3.2011 As at 31.03.2012 As at Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1001/Kol/2025 Trinity Vintrade Pvt. Ltd 3 31.03.2013 Other non-current assets 8,00,000 8,00,000 7. We have heard both sides and perused the material on record. We find that in the present case, a sum of Rs.8,00,056/- was advance during the F.Y 2011-12 which is clearly reflected from the order of the CIT(A) in para 6.3, therefore, the question of making addition in the current year which is relating to the earlier year’s advance, cannot be held to be justified. Therefore, we find that the ld. CIT(A) rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee by setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer and also we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the revenue. 8. In terms of above, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Kolkata, the 11th August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Sanjay Awasthi] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 11.08.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "