SANDHYA DAS,SILIGURI V. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX, SILIGURI

ITA 2472/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sandhya Das, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary issue was the existence of two PANs under the name of the assessee, which led to confusion regarding the correct bank account and associated income tax returns. The Income Tax Officer noted significant bank credits and cash deposits during the demonetization period under one PAN, while the assessee filed returns under another PAN. The Tribunal found the need for a detailed examination by the AO to reconcile the accounts and determine the correct taxable income, leading to the restoration of the case to the AO.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829062 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Kolkata
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 30-10-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S.B. CHAKRABORTHY
• Assessee Lawyers: APURVA SHAHA

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITA No. 2472/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year:2017-18) Sandhya Das Iskon Mandir Road, Haidarpara, Siliguri, West Bengal-734006 Vs. Income Tax Officer Office of the Income Tax, Siliguri-734010, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AHDPD1535B Assessee by : Shri Apurva Shaha, AR Revenue by : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR Date of hearing: 06.01.2026 Date of pronouncement: 13.01.2026 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 21.05.2025 for the AY 2017-18. 2. At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 60 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, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the assessee was having double Permanent Account Number by mistake of the counsel. The PAN Card of the assessee was mis-placed and the consultant of the assessee applied for fresh PAN in stead of re- applying for the copy of the PAN Card misplaced. The ld. AO noted Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA No. 2472/KOL/2025 Sandhya Das; A.Y. 2017-18 in the assessment order noted that there were credits of ₹2,91,69,653/- in her bank account number 236958 in SBI, Haidarpara, Siliguri, which was open with PAN No.AHDED1535B and included the cash deposits of ₹32,39,000 during demonetization period. Accordingly, the ld. AO noted that the assessee has not filed the return of income associated with the said Permanent Account Number. We also note that the assessee has another PAN with which the bank account number 20117 was opened i.e. ADVPD0925B. The assessee filed the return of income with the said PAN. We note that the assessee is carrying on the business and has depositing the sale proceeds into the bank account. In our opinion, the issue requires examination at the end of the ld. AO so that the proper reconciliation and verification could be made and the correct income could be brought to tax. In our opinion, it is a case of double PAN, when the assessee applied for the new PAN in stead of applying for the copy of the old PAN and hence, resulted into having two PAN Numbers. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the ends of justice could be well served if the issue is restored to the file of the ld. AO for fresh adjudication. Consequently, the appeal was restored to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to decide the same afresh after affording the reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13.01.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated:13.01.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 ITA No. 2472/KOL/2025 Sandhya Das; A.Y. 2017-18 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 "