REBANTI PAUL LEGAL HEIR OF ANIMESH PAUL,HABRA, NORTH CHABIS PARGANAS V. I.T.O., WARD - 50(2), KOLKATA

ITA 2548/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Rebanti Paul, the legal heir of Animesh Paul, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, Delhi, which had dismissed their earlier appeal due to non-compliance. The original assessment was made against Animesh Paul, who was a non-filer for the Assessment Year 2017-18, and had substantial cash deposits during the demonetization period, which were treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT noted that there was a duplicate application filed inadvertently and that another related appeal was already under consideration, leading to the decision to club the appeals and reassess the situation to ensure consistency in the judicial decisions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 315481 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No. 981/Kol/2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 142(1)

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. 2548/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rebanti Paul (legal heir of Animesh Paul) (PAN: AYQPP 1066 P) Vs. ITO, Ward- 50(2), Kolkata Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 30.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 15.05.2025 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Biswesware Ghosh, Ld. A.R For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Smt. Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, JCIT Sr. DR ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 08.07.2024 for AY 2017-18. 2 I.T.A. No. 2548/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rebanti Paul (legal heir of Animesh Paul) 2. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 73 days for this the assessee has filed condonation petition., which are as follows- 3 I.T.A. No. 2548/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rebanti Paul (legal heir of Animesh Paul) On perusal of the condonation petition, the reason for delay in filing the appeal seems to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the condonation petition as well as judicial pronouncement that the case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay is hereby condoned. 4 I.T.A. No. 2548/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rebanti Paul (legal heir of Animesh Paul) 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee, Shri Animesh Paul, the sole proprietor of Radharani Rice Mills, was non-filer of the return of income for AY 2017-18. It came into notice of the AO huge cash deposit in bank account particularly during demonetization period was made, accordingly, notice u/s 142(1) was issued to the assessee with request to file the return but the assessee did not file any return. The assessee did not file any return of income the AO has gathered information from the bank and it is seen that the assessee deposited Rs. 1,29,24,155/- during FY 2016-17. A show cause notice has been issued to the assessee but there was no compliance as a result of which AO has declared an amount of Rs. 1,29,24,155/- as an unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 4. After perusing the assessment order one Rebanti Paul being the legal representative of deceased Animesh Paul filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on account of non-compliance on behalf of the assessee. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 5. The ld. Counsel appeared on behalf of the assessee challenges the very impugned order thereby submitting that there was already an order passed by the ITAT, Kolkata in ITA No. 981/Kol/2023 against the same assessment order and the present appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was in fact duplicate application filed inadvertently by the representative of one of deceased as legal heirs. The Ld. Counsel filed a petition of the ITO, Ward-50, Kolkata by which he stated that it is different to give effect the order passed in ITA No. 981/Kol/2023 as there was an every chance of contradictory decision as the another appeal has already been filed. The Ld. A.R has only prayed that his case also be remitted back to the file of AO with a direction to pass an order by clubbing those appeals because there will be a chance to pass a contradictory order if the same is not being clubbed with the order of assessee passed in ITA No. 981/Kol/2023 being pending before the AO. 6. The Ld. D. R did not raise any objection. 5 I.T.A. No. 2548/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rebanti Paul (legal heir of Animesh Paul) 7. We have perused the Affidavit filed by the assessee as stated above, the relevant portion of the said affidavit is as under: “6. That recently on 25.11.2024 another letter has been received from the ITO, Ward- 50(1), Kolkata, that there had been another appeal filed from my PAN impleading me as legal heir and the Ld. CIT(A) order was also passed ex-parte confirming the AO’s order on 08.07.2024 and as two contradictory orders are standing before the ITO, Ward-50(1), Kolkata so he cannot give effect to the order as passed by the ITAT, Kolkata Benches vide appeal no. 981/Kol/2023.” We have also gone through the letter of ITO, Ward-50, Kolkata; note which is as follows: Going over the aforesaid letter it is clear that there were two appeals filed against the same assessment order in which 2nd one order has already been passed and remitted 6 I.T.A. No. 2548/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rebanti Paul (legal heir of Animesh Paul) back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication (ITA No. 981/Kol/2023). The present appeal before us is against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). Since the matter relates to both the appeals are same and it was by way of confusion, hence we are restoring the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO to verify the same by clubbing the order passed in ITA No. 981/Kol/2023 and thereafter pass an afresh order after hearing the assessee. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 15th May, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi /संजय अवèथी) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 15th May, 2025 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Rebanti Paul (legal heir of Animesh Paul), Bergoom, Habra, North 24 Parganas-743263 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-50(2), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "