SUVASIS PANJA,DURGACHAK HALDIA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 27(1) HALDIA, HALDIA

ITA 915/KOL/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Suvasis Panja against the order passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-2018. The primary contention revolves around the Income Tax Officer's (ITO) treatment of Rs.32,50,000 deposited during the demonetization period as income from undisclosed sources. The assessee argued that this amount was cash in hand, which was deposited in the bank, and thus, the addition made by the ITO was not sustainable. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found that the issues were not properly examined by the lower authorities and restored the matter to the ITO for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829283 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Kolkata
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 22-04-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIJIT ADHIKARY
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBASH AGARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Income from undisclosed sources
• Section: 44AD

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.915/KOL/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year. :2017-2018) Suvasis Panja, C/o Atin Das Advocate, Daharpur Tamluk Purba Medinipur West Bengal-721636 Vs ITO Ward-27(1), Haldia PAN No. : AJHPP 6824 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 12/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 12/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.03.2024 passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the assessee is running a cyber cafe and actual commission basis. This is as per the submissions before the AO as shown in page 7 of the paper book which reads as follows:- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.915/KOL/2024 2 3. It was submission that the assessee had declared the income u/s.44AD of the Act. The assessee had deposited an amount of Rs.32,50,000/- during the demonetization period which the AO had treated income from undisclosed sources of the assessee. The Ld.AR also drew my attention to pages 12 to 26 of the paper book, which are the copies of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.915/KOL/2024 3 the cash statement for the period 01/04/2016 to 31/03/2017. It was submission that this was basically cash in hands which deposited in the bank account of the assessee. It was submission that as the assessee had the cash in hand, the addition is not sustainable. 4. In reply, the Ld.Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A). 5. In respect of specific query as to how the provisions of section 44AD of the Act would apply especially in view of the provision of section 44AD(6)(ii) of the Act, insofar as the assessee is earning commission income, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that this has not been examined by the lower authorities. It was also specifically put to the Ld.AR as to how the assessee has not shown any drawings for any other expenses. It was the submission that these issues have not been considered by the AO. It was also put to the Ld.AR as what is the nature of the expenses shown in the cash statement and what is the nature of the income. It was also submitted this was also not been examined by the AO. It was submission that he has no objection if the issues are restored to the file of the AO for examination. The assessee admittedly has filed a revised grounds of appeal today which reads as follows:- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.915/KOL/2024 4 6. The Ld.AR submitted that he did not wish to press the ground No.2 for which has also signed to it. Thus, ground No.2 stands dismissed as withdrawn. 7. In respect of the other issues, as it is noticed that the issues have not been considered in its proper perspective by the Ld.AO and relevant questions have not been asked to extract the corrects facts and as the facts are required to examine this case, the issues of this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 8. In result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 12/01/2026. Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 12/01/2026 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.915/KOL/2024 5 आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "