SAGAR BOTHRA,HOWRAH V. NFAC, DELHI

ITA 2197/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sagar Bothra against an assessment order by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), which was contested on the grounds of jurisdictional invalidity. The assessee had initially declared a total income of 1,51,260 for the assessment year 2013-14, which was later re-assessed following the reopening of the case based on information regarding the sale of shares. The NFAC added 41,25,274 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the assessment was conducted under provisions that were not yet operational, leading to the quashing of the assessment order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837900 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: MD Mahimud SK Vs ITO, Kankanala Ravindra Reddy vs. Income-tax Officer, Triton Overseas (P.) Ltd. vs. Union of India, Samp Furniture (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAMPA RAY
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEP AGARWAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 148; 142(1); 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No. 2197/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year:2013-14) Sagar Bothra C/o Agarwal Vishwanath & Associates, 133/1/1A, S.N. Banerjee Road, Pushkal Bhawan, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700013, WB Vs. NFAC The National Faceless Assessment Centre, 2 nd Floor, E- Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. ANLPB4505H Assessee by : Shri Deep Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri Pampa Ray, DR Date of hearing: 29.01.2026 Date of pronouncement: 17.02.2026 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 20.11.2025 for the AY 2013-14. 2. At the outset, I note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 238 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, I find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and hence, I condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA No. 2197/KOL/2025 Sagar Bothra; A.Y. 2013-14 3. At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pressed only one issue which is against the invalid assessment framed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT (A)] vide order dated 13.03.2022, which is without jurisdiction and is accordingly, invalid. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 23.03.2014, declaring total income at ₹1,51,260/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case of the assessee was re-opened on the basis of information that the assessee had sold shares of penny scrip, M/s Finalysis Credit and Guarantee Co. Ltd. on Bombay Stock Exchange Platform amounting to ₹41,25,274/-. Notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 28.03.2021. in response to the notice, the assessee did not file any return. Accordingly, notice u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire was issued to the assessee. Accordingly to the AO the income to the extent of sale of shares has escaped assessment. The ld. AO made an addition of ₹41,25,274 u/s 68 of the Act, treating the same as unexplained cash credit and assessed total income of the assessee at ₹42,76,534/-. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) set aside the matter back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer. 6. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, I find that the assessment has been framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre vide order dated 13.03.2022, which in our opinion, is without jurisdiction as the Provisions of Section 151A of the Act which provides for faceless Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 ITA No. 2197/KOL/2025 Sagar Bothra; A.Y. 2013-14 assessment were notified on 29.03.2022 vide notification no. 18/2022/F. No. 370142/16/2022-TPL(Part) though the section 151A was brought on statute book by the Taxation and Other Law (realization and amendment of certain provisions) Act, 2020 on 01.11.2020. Considering these facts, the assessment framed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre is null and void as the same is without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in case MD Mahimud SK Vs ITO ITA No. 2230 & 2229/Kol/2024 order dated 4.3.2025. Similarly, the Telangana High Court in case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy vs. Income-tax Officer [2023] 156 taxmann.com 178 (TELANGANA)/[2023] 295 Taxman 652 (TELANGANA)[14-09-2023], Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Triton Overseas (P.) Ltd. vs. Union of India [2023] 156 taxmann.com 318 (Calcutta)[13-09-2023], Samp Furniture (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2025] 477 ITR 187 (Bombay)[05-08-2024]. 6.1. Therefore, respectfully following the above decisions , I quash the assessment framed by the AO/ NFAC. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.02.2026. Sd/- (RAJESH KUMAR) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 17.02.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Printed from counselvise.com Page | 4 ITA No. 2197/KOL/2025 Sagar Bothra; A.Y. 2013-14 Copy of the Order forwarded to: BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. Printed from counselvise.com "