SHIV SHAMBHU IRON AND STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMSHEDPUR V. ACIT CIRCLE 3(1), JAMSHEDPUR

ITA 286/RAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shiv Shambhu Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which upheld a reassessment of their income for the assessment year 2011-12. Initially, the assessee declared a total income of 30,17,990, which was later reassessed to 39,08,910 following scrutiny. Further, based on new information regarding substantial share capital and premium received, a subsequent reassessment raised the total income to 1,88,08,910. The assessee challenged the reassessment proceedings, claiming improper service of statutory notices, which deprived them of a fair hearing. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, restored the case to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 830600 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reassessment proceedings; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH-RANCHI VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.286/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shiv Shambhu Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd.…….…............................……….……Appellant Dropadi Bhawan, Station Road, Jugsalai, Jharkhand- 831002. [PAN: AALCS7663M] vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Jamshedpur.….....…..…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Akshay Ringasia, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Sumit Dasgupta, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : January 15, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : January 19, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 12.04.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2011–12 declaring a total income of ₹30,17,990. The case was selected for scrutiny and an assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed determining the total income at ₹39,08,910. Subsequently, based on information received, it was noticed that the assessee company had shown receipt of ₹1,49,00,000 comprising share capital of ₹14,90,000 and share premium of ₹1,34,10,000. On the basis of this information, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In response to the notice, the Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.286/Ran/2024 Shiv Shambhu Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd 2 assessee filed a return of income declaring the same income as originally returned. Thereafter, the assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act, determining the total income at ₹1,88,08,910. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal and sustained the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. Before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that the reassessment proceedings were bad in law, as the statutory notices were not properly served on the registered email ID of the assessee. It was submitted that the notices could not be accessed and due to improper service, the concerned persons could not effectively look into the matter. Consequently, the assessee was deprived of a reasonable opportunity of being heard. It was therefore prayed that, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee and the matter be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the lower authorities. 6. After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record, and considering the principles of natural justice and fair play, we are of the view that the assessee did not get a proper opportunity to represent its case. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after providing due and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.286/Ran/2024 Shiv Shambhu Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd 3 7. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 19th January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- [Ratnesh Nandan Sahay] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 19.01.2026. 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 "