RAJENDRA TOSAWAD,MUMBAI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

ITSSA 6/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals filed by three different assessees against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-20, concerning various assessment years. The appeals were consolidated due to their interconnection with a single group subjected to a search and seizure action. The primary issue was the lack of adequate representation and compliance before the Ld. CIT(A), leading to a decision to restore the issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication, emphasizing the importance of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 37583 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P.N. BARNWAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Search and seizure

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A Nos. 6 to 11/KOL/2025 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 & ITA No. 158 /Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & ITA No. 175 /Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2010-11 Rajendra Tosawad No. 311, 3rd Floor, Parekh Market, Kenedy Bridge, Opera House, Mumbai, Maharastra. (PAN: AAMPT9014B) Vs DCIT/ACIT, Central Circle- 1(1), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & IT(SS)A No. 146/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Neelam Tosawad 48-14-28, Akhila Aracade, Asilmetta Junction, Visakhapatnam-530016, Andhra Pradesh (PAN: ABJPT5665J) Vs DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & IT(SS)A Nos. 147 to 153/KOL/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2017-18 & 2 IT(SS)A Nos.6-11/Kol/2025, ITA No. 158/Kol/2025, ITA No. 159 & 160/Kol/2025, ITA Nos175/Kol/2025, IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, IT(SS)A Nos. 147 to 153/Kol/2024 ITA Nos. 159 & 160 /Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & Syndicate Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. 22, Block-A, 1st Floor, 22, Camac Street, Kolkata- 700016. (PAN: AAGCS6917B) Vs DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e (Adjournment petition rejected) Respondent by : Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 20.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : All these 18 captioned appeals have been filed by three different assessees against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-20 [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide orders dated 12.11.2024 (for IT(SS) Nos. 6 to 11/Kol/2025, dated 26.06.2024, for IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, AYs. 2011-12 to 2016-17), dated 13.11.2024 (for IT(SS)A No.158/Kol/2025, AY 2017-18), dated 30.09.2024 (for IT(SS) A No.159/Kol/2025, AY 2010-11), dated 24.10.2024 (for IT(SS) No. 160/Kol/2025, AY 2010-11), dated 12.11.2024 (for IT(SS) No. 175/Kol/2025 for AY 2010-11), dated 24.10.2024 (for IT(SS)A No. 147 to 153/Kol/2024, for AYs.2011-12 to 2017-18 dated 24.10.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 3 IT(SS)A Nos.6-11/Kol/2025, ITA No. 158/Kol/2025, ITA No. 159 & 160/Kol/2025, ITA Nos175/Kol/2025, IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, IT(SS)A Nos. 147 to 153/Kol/2024 1.1. It is seen that in IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, there is a delay of 115 days which has been requested to be condoned on the ground that the search action led to extreme financial hardships, due to which a suitable counsel could not be engaged. Thus, finally appropriate action could not be taken. The reasons for delay are plausible and thus, the delay is condoned. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri P.N. Barnwal, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 2.1. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, undated adjournment letters have been filed, wherein it is mentioned as follows: 4 IT(SS)A Nos.6-11/Kol/2025, ITA No. 158/Kol/2025, ITA No. 159 & 160/Kol/2025, ITA Nos175/Kol/2025, IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, IT(SS)A Nos. 147 to 153/Kol/2024 Adjournment applications have been rejected. This is because on 18.03.2025 the assessee had filed a letter for consolidation of all the appeals together and for fixing the appeals together on 20.03.2025. The application for consolidation reads as under: 5 IT(SS)A Nos.6-11/Kol/2025, ITA No. 158/Kol/2025, ITA No. 159 & 160/Kol/2025, ITA Nos175/Kol/2025, IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, IT(SS)A Nos. 147 to 153/Kol/2024 At the request of the assessee all the appeals have been consolidated and posted for hearing today. Now, the assessee has sought time. 3. It was submitted by the Ld. DR that this was a group of cases which were subject to a search on 18.01.2017. Additional income has been 6 IT(SS)A Nos.6-11/Kol/2025, ITA No. 158/Kol/2025, ITA No. 159 & 160/Kol/2025, ITA Nos175/Kol/2025, IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, IT(SS)A Nos. 147 to 153/Kol/2024 offered in the course of search and assessments had been completed thereon 3.1. A perusal of the case records, with the help of Ld. DR, has revealed that all these 18 cases pertain to a single group and all these appeals have their roots in a search and seizure action on the Syndicate Jewellers Group of cases. Thus, admittedly, all these 18 cases are interconnected in some way or another. 3.2. It is also seen that in some of the cases there has been sketchy presentation of facts and for this reason, in some of the cases, the assessees have pleaded before the Ld. CIT(A) that adequate opportunities were not provided to them. This has led to a Remand Report being called for in one case pertaining to Syndicate Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. case [IT(SS)A No. 147/Kol/2024 for AY 2011-12]. However, it is seen that on being confronted with the said remand report, the assessee concerned has not responded before the Ld. CIT(A). It is also noticed that in cases belonging to Rajendra Tosawad there has been absolutely no representation before the Ld. CIT(A). Similarly, in the one case of Neelam Tosawad also there has been no representation before the Ld. CIT(A). Resultantly, it deserves to be held that barring the case of M/s. Syndicate Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2011- 12, there has been no worthwhile compliance before the Ld. CIT(A). 4. It was the submission by the Ld. DR that admittedly, no fresh evidence could be produced before the Tribunal and, therefore, the orders of the lower authorities are liable to be upheld. 5. We have considered the submission of the Ld. CIT, DR and also gone through the records. A perusal of the facts of the group of cases shows that in some of the cases there have been attempts at filing evidence before the 7 IT(SS)A Nos.6-11/Kol/2025, ITA No. 158/Kol/2025, ITA No. 159 & 160/Kol/2025, ITA Nos175/Kol/2025, IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, IT(SS)A Nos. 147 to 153/Kol/2024 Ld. CIT(A) but in most of the cases there is no response to the various notices sent for hearing. Even before the ld. Assessing Officer, the representation has been sketchy. Though, we are in agreement with the Ld. CIT, DR that fresh evidence should not be entertained by the Tribunal, however, considering the fact that natural justice is a predominant factor when adjudicating an appeal and in the interest of natural justice we deem it fit to give adequate opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its cases. Thus, the issues in all these appeals are restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication after setting aside all the impugned orders subject to a levy of cost in the following manner: Sl. No. Amount of cost IT(SS)A. No. 1. Rs. 1,00,000/- 6/Kol/2025 2. Rs.50,000/- 7/Kol/2025 3. Rs.50,000/- 8/Kol/2025 4. Rs.1,00,000/- 9/Kol/2025 5. Rs.50,000/- 10/Kol/2025 6. Rs.50,000/- 11/Kol/2025 7. Rs.1,00,000/- 158/Kol/2025 8. Rs.1,00,000/- 159/Kol/2025 9. Rs. 1,00,000/- 160/Kol/2025 10. Rs.1,00,000/- 175/Kol/2025 11. Rs.1,00,000/- 146/Kol/2024 12. Rs.1,00,000/- 147/Kol/2025 13. Rs.1,00,000/- 148/Kol/2025 14. Rs.1,00,000/- 149/Kol/2025 15. Rs.1,00,000/- 150/Kol/2025 16. Rs.1,00,000/- 151/Kol/2025 17. Rs.1,00,000/- 152/Kol/2025 18. Rs.1,00,000/- 153/Kol/2025 6. This being so, the issues in all these appeals are restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh subject to the assessee paying a cost as mentioned above to the Legal Aid Services, 3rd floor of the 8 IT(SS)A Nos.6-11/Kol/2025, ITA No. 158/Kol/2025, ITA No. 159 & 160/Kol/2025, ITA Nos175/Kol/2025, IT(SS)A No. 146/Kol/2024, IT(SS)A Nos. 147 to 153/Kol/2024 Centenary Building, High Court, Calcutta, 700001, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the Ld. CIT(A) at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed. 7. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes subject to the direction given above. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 20th March, 2025 JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Shri Rajendra Tosawad, Sm. Neelam Tosawad & Syndicate Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. 2. The Respondent. DCIT/ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A), Kolkata-20. 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata. "