SANTOSH KUMAR SINHA,PURNIA V. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA 268/PAT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by Santosh Kumar Sinha for the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19 against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna. These orders were issued following a search and seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act on Max Seven Hospital Pvt. Ltd. Group, Purnea, in which Sinha was related. The primary contention in the appeals was the ex parte nature of the CIT(A)'s decision, which did not consider the merits of the case but was based on the assessee's non-compliance. The Tribunal, after hearing the arguments and reviewing the CIT(A)'s order, decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough re-examination, providing the assessee an opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780372 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH-PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member ITA Nos.268 & 269/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Santosh Kumar Sinha…….………………. ……………..…..........……….Appellant S/o Late Satya Narayan Lal, Carriers Colony, Sakti Nagar, Purnia, Bihar – 854301. [PAN: AWHPS7019N] vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna…………..……. ……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri K. P. Jalan, CA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, CIT-DR appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : September 22, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : October 09, 2025 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: Both the captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee for the assessment years 2017-18 & 2018-19 against separate orders both dated 31.03.2025 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) respectively. Since, the issues involved in both the appeals are common and relate to the same assessee, therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. ITA No.268/Pat/2025 is taken as lead case for narration of facts. 2. ITA No.268/Pat/2025 – Brief facts of the case are that in this case, a search & seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Act was conducted on Max Seven Hospital Pvt. Ltd. Group, Purnea on 19/04/2017. The assessee herein Shri Santosh Kumar Sinha was related Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.268 & 269/Pat/2025 Santosh Kumar Sinha 2 to Max Seven Hospital Group of cases. Thereafter, notice u/s 153C of the Act was issued on 17/09/2019 to the assessee along with questionnaire. The assessee filed return of income in response to notice u/s 153C declaring total income as Rs.8,29,060/-. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and a show cause letter was issued on 06/12/2019. The Assessing Officer passed order u/s 143(3) of the Act on 27.12.2019 determining total income at Rs.17,48,240/- by adding an amount of Rs.1,73,550/- as undisclosed income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal has been dismissed by passing an ex parte order as there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee has come in appeal before us. The ld. AR instead of arguing on merits of the case has only prayed that the appeal of the assessee may be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration by affording opportunity to the assessee of hearing as the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order and not on the merits. 5. The ld. DR did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal of the assessee to the file of the ld. CIT(A). 6. After hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties and particularly on perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), it appears to us that there was no compliance before the ld. CIT (A) which has resulted into passing the ex-parte order by the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee did not file any explanation in order to submit any response to the notices issued and the order of the ld. CIT(A) have not been passed on merits rather passed on technical issue. Under these circumstances, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration after affording opportunity to the assessee Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.268 & 269/Pat/2025 Santosh Kumar Sinha 3 of hearing. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the remand proceedings by submitting necessary explanations and evidences to substantiate his claim. Thus, ITA No.268/Pat/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. ITA No.269/Pat/2025 - Since the facts and issues involved in both the appeals are identical and particularly the order of the ld. CIT(A) in this case is an ex parte order also, therefore, our findings/directions given above in ITA No.268/Pat/2025 will mutatis mutandis apply to ITA No.269/Pat/2025 too. Hence, ITA No.269/Pat/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 9th October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 09.10.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "