SUBHANKAR GHOSH,SILIGURI V. ITO, WARD 1(2), , SILIGURI

ITA 1104/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Subhankar Ghosh, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, Delhi, which had dismissed his appeal due to non-submission of response. The primary issue arose from the AO's addition of unexplained money amounting to Rs. 3,29,27,800 to Ghosh's income for the Assessment Year 2019-20, following a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal noted the assessee's lack of opportunity to present his case at earlier stages and decided to remit the matter back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 707006 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी राक ेश ͧमĮ, लेखा सटèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member &Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 1104/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Subhankar Ghosh (PAN: BPWPG 4969 Q) Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Siliguri Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 26.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 07.07.2025 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Sujit Basu, A.R Shri Rajeeb Mukherjee, A.R For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT Sr. DR ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 28.04.2025 for AY 2019-20. 2 I.T.A. No. 1104/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Subhankar Ghosh 2. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 2,98,420/-. As per the information available with the department in accordance with the mismanagement Central Board Direct Taxes, the assessee has entered into the following financial transaction with the year under consideration i.e. unexplained credit in the bank account Sirdi Sai International an amount of Rs. 1,96,07,602/-. The AO passed an order under Clause (d) of Section 148A and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In response to the notice the assessee filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 5,47,770/-. Subsequently notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) have also been issued, show cause notice has also been issued. The AO after going over the submission filed by the assessee added an unexplained money an amount of Rs. 3,29,27,800/- to the total income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as the assessee failed to submit any response before the Ld. CIT(A). Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 4. The Ld. A.R instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only prayed that the matter be remitted back to the file of AO by giving an opportunity to the assessee to place all his case before the AO. The Ld. A.R submits that the assessee in fact assessee failed to submit his case in true perspective before the AO nor he could place his submission and material before the Ld. CIT(A) hence, the assessee has to give an opportunity to substantiate his case before the AO by affording an opportunity to the assessee. 5. The Ld. DR did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal back to the file of AO. 6. Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties, we have perused the order of lower authorities and found that the assessee was engaged in the business of cigarettes, raw tobacco, hardware items, grocery items under the name & 3 I.T.A. No. 1104/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Subhankar Ghosh style of Sirdi Sai International. The AO in its order has held that the assessee did not file any evidence to prove that the assessee was engaged in the business of cigarettes, raw tobacco etc. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee when there was no response filed by the assessee. Before us the assessee apart from the merit of the case has also taken a legal ground challenging the very issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. It is not in dispute that order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex- party order, matter relates to the order passed u/s 148(d) of the Act, we are considering the submission made by the assessee, inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO for fresh adjudication after affording an opportunity to the assessee to place his facts legally as well as factually. The AO is directed to pass a afresh order after hearing the assessee on legal and facts. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 7th July , 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mishra /राक ेश ͧमĮ) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 7th July, 2025 SM, Sr. PS 4 I.T.A. No. 1104/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Subhankar Ghosh Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Subhankar Ghosh, House No. 118, Surya Sikha Sarani, Hyderpara, Siliguri-734006 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-1(2), Siliguri 3. Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "