SOUTHOPEN INFRANIRMAN CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA V. ITO, WARD 9(1), , KOLKATA

ITA 1268/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Southopen Infranirman Consultants Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)) that upheld an addition of Rs. 28,00,000 as unexplained credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer after the assessee failed to comply with notices during the assessment proceedings. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not consider the submissions of the assessee and thus remanded the case for a fresh examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717032 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1268/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Southopen Infranirman Consultants Pvt. Ltd.……………….……....Appellant 228A, Chittaranjan Avenue, W.B – 700006. [PAN: AARCS2287B] vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata……………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances by: Smt. Swati Baid, FCA appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Susanta Saha, ACIT- Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : August 13, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : August 18, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 01.04.2025 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 has filed return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 declaring total income of Rs.60440/-. On information received that the assessee company had received accommodation entry of Rs.28,00,000/- routed through the bank account of M/s Strong Well Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. during the F.Y 2017-18. Later on, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 by issuing notice u/s 148 as to believe by the Assessing Officer that the said income of the had escaped assessment. Thereafter, notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee to furnish necessary details to prove the source the deposit in the bank amount. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1268/Kol/2025 Southopen Infranirman Consultants Pvt. Ltd 2 As the assessee made no compliance to the various notices issued by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings, therefore, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment by making addition of Rs.28,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained credit. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), where the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex parte order by simply upholding the order of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising various grounds. However, the contention of the ld. AR is that the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex parte order without considering the case on merits, which is not justified, therefore, she prayed for one more opportunity may be granted. 6. On the other hand, the ld. DR stated that the assessee is a habitual defaulter and did not comply to the notices issued by the lower authorities, therefore, the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed in limine. 7. We, after hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, find that in the present case, since the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the submission made by assessee, therefore, in the interests of justice, it is necessary to remand back the whole issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re- examine the issue on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) as and when asked for without any fail and in case, the assessee fails to appear in remand proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) may pass a speaking order in accordance with law on the basis of materials available on record. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1268/Kol/2025 Southopen Infranirman Consultants Pvt. Ltd 3 8. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 18TH August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Sanjay Awasthi] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 18.08.2025. 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 "