SANJAY RUNGTA,RANCHI V. A.C.I.T., CC-3(1), KOLKATA

ITSSA 33/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Sanjay Rungta against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata, for the assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15, and 2015-16. The appeals were consolidated due to common issues across the years. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted at the premises of the Rungta group, to which the assessee belongs. Following this, notices under section 153A were issued, and due to non-compliance with a notice under section 142(1), the AO passed an assessment order declaring a higher income than reported by the assessee. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for lack of response. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and in the interest of justice, decided to remit the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, providing the assessee an opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 361260 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Search and seizure
• Section: 142(1); 132; 153A

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.(S.S) A. Nos.33, 34 & 35/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sanjay Rungta (PAN: ADEPR 5164 P) Vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), Kolkata Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 20.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 22.05.2025 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Devesh Poddar For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Madanappa Raghuvir, CIT DR ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: These are the appeals preferred by the assessee against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 21, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 21.01.2025 for AY 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 respectively. In all the 2 I.T.(S.S)A. Nos. 33, 34 & 35/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sanjay Rungta appeals, issues are common, hence taken up together for disposal. We take in IT(SS)A No. 33/Kol/2025 for AY 2012-13 as a lead case. 2. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the residential and business premises of Rungta group situated at various locations, the assessee belongs to this group. A notice u/s 153A of the Act in response to the notice, the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 11,12,410/- for AY 2012-13. Notices u/s 143(2) along with questionnaires were issued. The Ld. A.R of the asse only submitted copy of balance sheet etc. but there was non-compliance made in relation to the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, as a result of which, assessment order was passed declaring total income of Rs. 14,70,410/-. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein also the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of response. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 4. The Ld. A.R, instead of arguing into the merit of the case in all the three appeals, only submitted that the appeal of the assessee be restored into the file of AO by giving an opportunity to the assessee to place all the facts and documents. The assessee prayed that for the interest of justice, the assessee has to be given an opportunity to place his case before the AO. 5. Contrary to that the Ld. D.R supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection in restoring the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO. 6. Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties, we have perused the order of Ld. CIT(A) and find that the assessment was done when there was non-compliance on behalf of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) has also dismissed the appeal of the assessee as there was no response on behalf of the assessee. Keeping in view, the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) and for the interest of justice, we are remitting the appeal of the assessee back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication. 3 I.T.(S.S)A. Nos. 33, 34 & 35/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sanjay Rungta The assessee is also directed to co-operate in the proceedings. The order passed by both the lower authorities are here by set aside. The case is remitted back to the file of AO. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 22nd May, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 22nd May, 2025 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Sanjay Rungta, Pushpanjali, Bariatu Road, Ranchi-834008. 2. Respondent – ACIT, Central Circle- 3(1), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)- 21, Kolkata 4. Ld. PCIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "