RAM KUMAR,JAMSHEDPUR V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR

ITA 189/RAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ram Kumar, the appellant, who contested the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-3, which was passed ex-parte for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The primary issue arose from a discrepancy in reported professional receipts and the income assessed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) following a survey operation under section 133A of the Income Tax Act. The ITO added Rs.10,52,262 to the assessee's income, treating it as undisclosed income due to insufficient explanation from the assessee regarding the discrepancy between the TDS deducted and the income reported. The CIT(Appeals) upheld this addition, leading to the appeal before the ITAT, which found merit in providing another opportunity to the assessee to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 771932 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Corroborative evidences; Principle of natural justice; TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 142(1); 133A

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 189/RAN/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Ram Kumar 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-RANCHI ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Hybrid Court Hearing] Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 189/RAN/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Ram Kumar,…………………………………………..Appellant C/o. Ram Bilash Prasad Gupta, Gayatri Niwas, Ekta Colony, Majhi Tola, Adityapur, Jamshedpur-831013, Jharkhand [PAN:ANSPK0996Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle, Office Road, Jamshedpur-831001, Jharkhand Appearances by: Shri Akshay Ringasia, A.R., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: July 21, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R Per Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 189/RAN/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Ram Kumar 2 Patna-3, dated 30th March, 2025 passed for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The ld. Authorized Representative Shri Akshay Ringasia submitted a letter dated 21.07.2025 before the Bench praying for adjournment of three weeks in the matter. We have perused the record in the Open Court and found that the ld. CIT(Appeals) passed the order ex-parte without going into the merit of the case. The ld. CIT(Appeals) passed the order ex-parte mainly on the ground that the assessee was provided several opportunities of hearing and called for written submissions and documentary evidences in support of his ground of appeal raised, but the assessee did not avail any of the opportunities of being heard and not furnished any supporting evidence in support of his claim. Therefore, we do not deem it appropriate to grant any adjournment to the assesseee. Hence, the application for adjournment is rejected. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant-assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income showing total income of Rs.36,48,610/- on 04.10.2018. A survey operation was conducted in the case of assessee under section 133A of the Income Tax Act by the ITO, Ward-3(3), Jamshedpur in the business premises on 28.02.2018. During the course of survey proceedings, documents vide Identification Marks RK-01 to RK-04 were impounded. The case was selected for compulsory scrutiny as per CBDT guidelines. Notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served upon the assessee. As the assessee failed to reply to the notices, a Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 189/RAN/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Ram Kumar 3 letter was issued on 01.02.2021 giving final opportunity to the assessee and compliance to this was to be made on 10.02.2021. In response to the notices, the assessee submitted some documents on ITBA portal. From Form 26AS of the assessee, it was found that deducted TDS under section 194J was Rs.4,68,868/- and professional receipts were Rs.46,88,681/- for FY 2017-18. During the course of survey operation, the assessee received Rs.14,72,295/- as per receipts of his professional fees from his clinic upto 28.02.2018, which is different from the above amount on which TDS was deducted. Professional receipts were Rs.62,94,821/- for AY 2018-19 and from the ITR filed, it was shown gross receipts from profession to the tune of Rs.52,42,559/- . The assessee was requested to explain why the difference of Rs.10,52,262/- should not be treated as undisclosed income. Getting no satisfactory reply from the assessee, the ld. Assessing Officer added Rs.10,52,262/- to the total income of the assessee. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 4. The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex- parte as the assessee failed to produce satisfactory documentary evidences in support of his claim inspite of sufficient opportunities given. 5. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 189/RAN/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Ram Kumar 4 6. It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT(Appeals) simply upholding the order of ld. Assessing Officer and without going into the merit of the case dismissed the appeal. Ld. Counsel pleaded to set aside both the orders of revenue authorities. 7. It was the submission of the ld. Departmental Representative that sufficient opportunity was being provided to the assessee. Therefore, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has no other option except dismissing the appeal and he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). 8. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without going into the merit of the case. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, we are of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, we remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him and to decide it afresh on merit. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) 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 are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 189/RAN/2025 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Ram Kumar 5 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/08/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Ratnesh Nandan Sahay) (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Accountant Member Vice-President Kolkata, the 25th day of August, 2025 Copies to :(1) Ram Kumar, C/o. Ram Bilash Prasad Gupta, Gayatri Niwas, Ekta Colony, Majhi Tola, Adityapur, Jamshedpur-831013, Jharkhand (2) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Office Road, Jamshedpur-831001, Jharkhand (3) CIT(Appeals), Patna-3; (4) CIT - ; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. Printed from counselvise.com "