SIKHA RANI DE,BANKURA V. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), BANKURA

ITA 1750/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sikha Rani De, the appellant, who contested an intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which resulted in an adjustment to her income based on TDS entries that were allegedly mismatched due to a clerical error linking her PAN to another entity's TDS credits. The initial appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed due to a significant delay in filing, which the assessee attributed to the ongoing rectification process of the TDS mismatch. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that the delay should be condoned considering the circumstances and remanded the case back to the Ld. CIT(A) for a decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 791150 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Siddarth Co-operative Credit and Thrift Society Ltd vs ITO [2025] 478 ITR 424 (Chhattisgarh)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; TDS

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 1750/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sikha Rani De Vs. I.T.O., Ward-3(1), Bankura (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: ADNPD7748N Appearances: Assessee represented by : D.K. Sen, (Adv.). Department represented by : Manas Mondal, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 03-December-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 11-December-2025 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-7, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. ‘Addl/JCIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2017-18 dated 08.07.2025. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the order of the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, passed u/s 250 thereby dismissing the appeal, erred in denying substantive justice on hyper technical ground. 2. For that the intimation u/s 143(1) dated 30/08/2018 issued by CPC, Bengaluru, thereby making adjustment in reference to 26AS is arbitrary and illegal. 3. For that CPC, Bengaluru, in consideration of fact and circumstances of the case, erred in making adjustment of Rs. 14,43,708.00 by way of adding with the income of the appellant. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA No.: 1750/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sikha Rani De. 4. For that the appellant in consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, cannot be made to suffer from addition of payment not received by her nor did she claim TDS in the ITR. 5. For that the appellant reserves his right to, add to, to alter and/or to amend the ground/s taken and to adduce paper/s and document/s at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that an intimation under section 143(1) of the Act was issued on 30/08/2018 by the CPC in which certain adjustment was made and against which the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the appeal was delayed by 2016 days, the same was not admitted for adjudication and was dismissed as not admitted. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal however the grounds of appeal mentioned relate to the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act and not to the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 4. Rival submissions were heard and the record and the submissions made have been examined. 5. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the TDS was wrongly matched as the PAN was wrongly issued. In form No. 26AS, the TDS was wrongly mentioned and the credits of another account in the name of the company for another PAN were shown in the hands of the assessee. The assessee filed a rectification application but no speaking order was passed and the same was dismissed. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but as there was a delay of 2067 days in filing the appeal, the appeal was dismissed on account of delay and the merits of the case were not even discussed. The delay occurred as the assessee was pursuing the rectification application without any order being passed and, therefore, the delay ought to have been condoned. The account belongs to a company and the TDS was made in the name of the Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 ITA No.: 1750/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sikha Rani De. assessee with the assessee getting only rental income. The Ld. DR stated that the credit for TDS was given to the assessee and, therefore, the income was enhanced. The assessee has filed a paper book containing statement of deposit excluding TDS in Current Account No. 491010200003759 with Axis Bank, Bankura Branch, bank statement in respect of the Current Account, Form No. 26AS, intimation of Axis Bank, Bankura Branch regarding PAN status of the Current Account No. 491010200003759 which is at page 20 of the paper book and the reply of the assessee filed before the Ld. CIT(A). As per page 20 of the paper book filed, the CIF Id-491006804 PAN AAGCR6793J is updated since 26/11/2014. The assessee requested that the matter may be remanded to the Ld. AO to enquire into the facts so that justice can be done to the assessee as the income does not belong to the assessee. 6. We have considered the submission made. Since there was some errors in linking the bank account with the assessee with the same said to belong to a company, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play and since the assessee claims that it was only receiving rental income from the nursing home which was being run by the company Ritawari Healthcare Services Pvt. Ltd. and the receipts belonging to the company were being credited in this account, the additional documents being filed are admitted as they go to the root of the matter. The assessee has relied upon the decision of Siddarth Co-operative Credit and Thrift Society Ltd vs ITO [2025] 478 ITR 424 (Chhattisgarh) in support of the claim that the time spent in pursuing the rectification application needed to be condoned by the Ld. CIT(A) for the delay in filing the appeal. We are of the view that the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay and adjudicated the appeal on the merits of the case. Therefore, after examining the facts of the case and the law, we deem it Printed from counselvise.com Page | 4 ITA No.: 1750/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sikha Rani De. appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) for disposal of the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee on merits by passing a speaking order. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission it wants to make in support of its grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments and rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 shall also be followed and an opportunity of being heard may be provided to the Ld. AO, if required. Accordingly, all the grounds taken by the assessee in his appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 11th December, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Sonjoy Sarma] [Rakesh Mishra] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 11.12.2025 Bidhan (Sr. P.S.) Printed from counselvise.com Page | 5 ITA No.: 1750/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sikha Rani De. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Sikha Rani De, Patpur, P.O. & Dist.- Bankura, West Bengal, 722101. 2. I.T.O., Ward-3(1), Bankura. 3. Addl/JCIT(A)-7, Delhi. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. 6. Guard File. //True copy // By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata Printed from counselvise.com "