RAJESH KUMAR SHAW ( PROPRITOR OF : M/S RAJ TRADING ),KOLKATA V. I.T.O., WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA

ITA 2007/KOL/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Rajesh Kumar Shaw against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, which dismissed his appeal for want of prosecution. The original assessment for the Assessment Year 2021-22 had significantly increased the assessee's declared income from Rs. 14,14,140 to Rs. 15,60,13,271 based on scrutiny findings that included purchases from persons who had not filed returns. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not addressed the merits of the case in his dismissal and thus restored the matter for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 35957 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी संजय अवèथी, लेखा सटèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey,Judicial Member & Shri Sanjay Awasthi,Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 2007/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Rajesh Kumar Shaw (PAN: ILWPS 1835 J) Vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 05.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 25.02.2025 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Sanjay Chatterjee, FCA For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Rajat Mitra, CIT Dr ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 11.07.2024 for AY 2021-22. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 18 days in filing the appeal, and assessee has filed a condonation petition by explaining 2 I.T.A. No. 2007/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Rajesh Kumar Shaw. the cause of delay. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay as the delay is of only 18 days. On perusal of the above condonation petition, we find that delay has been explained, so we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee carrying on business under the proprietorship firm name and style of M/s Raj Trading. The assessee filed return of income for AY 2021-22 declaring total income of Rs. 14,14,140/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. The AO find that as per the information available, the assessee had claimed to have made purchases from the persons who have not filed return of income for AY 2021-22. The details of enquiry have been conducted. Notices u/s 133(6) were issued to the parties on the e-mail as provided by the assessee. The AO after going over the submission filed by the assessee passed assessement order assessed the total income of Rs. 15,60,13,271/-. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of prosecution. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the present appeal preferred by the assessee before us. 5. The Ld. Counsel appeared on behalf of the assessee instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only submitted that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) did not pass order merit. The Ld. Counsel submits that the assessee should have given an opportunity to place his case before the Ld. CIT(A). 6. Contrary to that the ld. D.R supports the impugned order. 7. We have gone through the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and find that CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. There was no discussion on the merit of the case. Before us, the assessee undertake that the assessee will remain vigilant in proceedings if the appeal of the assessee be restored in the file of Ld. CIT(A). 3 I.T.A. No. 2007/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Rajesh Kumar Shaw. 7. Keeping in view, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), and for the interest of justice, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) to pass afresh order after hearing the assessee. The order passed by the CIT(A) is hereby set aside. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 25th February, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi/संजय अवèथी) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 25th February, 2025 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Rajesh Kumar Shaw (Proprietor of M/s Raj Trading), 2/A/2, Motilal Mullick Lane, Alambazar, Kolkata-700035. 2. Respondent – Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 3. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 4. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "