SATBIR MAHATO,KOLKATA V. ITO, WARD 24(3), HOOGHLY

ITA 1155/KOL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Satbir Mahato against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed an addition of \\u20b914,06,250 to his income for the Assessment Year 2009-10. The addition was initially \\u20b91,50,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer, which was later reduced by the CIT (A). The addition was based on substantial cash deposits in a bank account opened in the name of the assessee but operated by Shri Devesh Upadhyaya, who used the account for providing accommodation entries. The Tribunal found that the income from these deposits had already been assessed in the hands of Shri Upadhyaya, and thus, the addition in the hands of the assessee was unwarranted.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25202 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BONNINE DEBBARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: SOMNATH GHOSH; USING
• Keywords: Accommodation entries
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3); 131; 133(6)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITA No.1155/KOL/2023 (Assessment Year:2009-10) Satbir Mahato C/o. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Vs. ITO, Ward 24(3) Aaykar Bhavan, Hooghly, Khadina More, G.T. Road, 3rd Floor, P.O. chinsurah, P.S. Chinsurah, Dist-712101, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AWKPM4651K Assessee by : Shri Somnath Ghosh, AR Revenue by : Shri Bonnine Debbarma, DR Date of hearing: 06.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 17.03.2025 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 31.0.2023 for the AY 2009-10. 02. At the time of hearing, the assessee only pressed the issue raised on merit which is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the addition of ₹14,06,250/- as against the addition of ₹1,50,00,000/- made by the ld. Assessing Officer. 03. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 18.05.2016, declaring the total income of ₹18,600/-. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on the ground that the assessee deposited huge cash into his bank account. Accordingly, the statutory notices were issued along with questionnaire, which were duly served upon the assessee. The Page | 2 ITA No.1155/KOL/2023 Satbir Mahato; A.Y. 2009-10 assessee replied the said notices by furnishing the evidences as called for by the AO. The ld. AO in para no.2 of the assessment order noted that the assessee appeared before the ld. AO from time to time and submitted written submissions stating that he had no business nor had deposited any cash during the said financial year. The assessee stated that in fact the cash belonged to Shri Devesh Upadhyaya, a known person of the assessee who used his PAN and opened a Bank account in ICICI Bank and also operated the same. Thereafter, the ld. AO summoned the said person Shri Devesh Upadhyaya and his statement was recorded u/s 131 of the Act, in which he admitted that he had opened the bank account in the name of the assessee by using his PAN and operated the same. He was further stated that the entire cash was belonging to him. In the meantime, the ld. AO issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to the Branch manager, ICICI bank for supplying the copy of bank statement for the said financial year. The AO observed that aggregating to ₹18.75 crores cash was deposited in the said bank account. Finally, the ld. AO estimated and assessed the income at the rate of 8% of the total deposit of ₹18.75 crores, thereby made an addition of ₹1.50 crore to the income of the assessee. 04. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) after following the decision of the various co-ordinate Benches partly allowed the appeal by deleting the addition to the tune of ₹1,35,93,750/- and sustaining the addition to the extent of ₹14,06,250/- at 0.75% of total accommodation entries provided. Now, the assessee is in appeal before us challenging the part confirmation of the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. 05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that undisputedly the cash was deposited in the assessee’s bank account in ICICI bank account which belonged Page | 3 ITA No.1155/KOL/2023 Satbir Mahato; A.Y. 2009-10 to Shri Devesh Upadhyaya, who opened the bank account in assessee’s name by using his PAN and operated the same for providing accommodation entries. Mr. Devesh Upadhyaya, deposited ₹18.75 cores cash in the said bank account and the same was given to various parties as accommodation entries. We have also examined the statement recoded u/s 131 of the Act by the ld. AO of the said person and while answering to question no.11 to 18, Shri Devesh Upadhyaya admitted that the cash deposited in the assessee’s bank account belonged to him and he used the bank account for giving accommodation entries. We even note that in his( Shri Devesh Upadhyaya ) assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, a copy of which is available at page no. 14 to 16 of the paper book, his income was assessed by the ld. AO at the rate of 0.10% of the total cash deposits in the order dated 16.03.2016, passed u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. Considering these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the addition is partly confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) in the hands of the assessee to the tune of ₹1,06,250, is uncalled for and unwarranted and cannot be sustained as this income has been assessed in the hands of Shri Devesh Upadhyaya. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT (A) on this issue and direct the ld. AO to delete the deletion. 06. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.03.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated:17.03.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Page | 4 ITA No.1155/KOL/2023 Satbir Mahato; A.Y. 2009-10 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata "