TARAK NATH KAR,KOLKATA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

ITA 133/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Tarak Nath Kar, a retired employee of M/s ONGC Ltd., who did not file a return of income despite having taxable income. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and assessed the income based on available information due to non-compliance by the assessee. The AO made several additions to the income, including a significant investment addition under section 69. The assessee's appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was largely unsuccessful, leading to the appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT decided to remand the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need to verify the retirement benefits and other claims made by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711425 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 148; 10

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH”, KOLKATA SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 133/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Tarak Nath Kar, 49A, Mahendra Banerjee Road, Kolkata - 700060 [PAN: AILPK8919K] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. Income Tax Officer, NFAC, National Faceless Assessment Centre, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi – 110033 ................................. Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Kumar Jit Das, Adv. Department represented by : Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT-DR S.B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 22.07.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 24.07.2025 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. This appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), dated 27.12.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. 1.1 In this case, the admitted fact is that the assessee has not filed any return of income in spite of there being taxable income. Thereafter, the Ld.AO issued a notice u/s 148 of the Act on 31.03.2021 and gave several opportunities to the assessee to present the facts of his case. It is recorded in para 8 at page 2 of the Ld. AO’s order that due to non-compliance by the assessee his income was assessed on the basis of information available Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 133/Kol/2025 Tarak Nath Kar with the Ld. AO. Thereafter, the Ld.AO made several additions, including the addition of Rs. 15,00,000/- u/s 69 of the Act. 1.2 Aggrieved with this action of the Ld. AO, the assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) where he was largely unsuccessful in pleading his case. 1.3 Further aggrieved, the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds: “A. For that the learned assessing officer erred in law as well as in fact in disallowing the allowance to the extent exempt u/s 10 of the amount Rs. 10,73,567.12/- and determined gross salary to the tune of Rs. 52,89,753/-. B. For that the learned assessing officer erred in law as well as in fact in adding a cash deposit of Rs. 11,000/- in total income u/s 69A. C. For that the learned assessing officer wrongfully and whimsically added the investment of your appellant of the amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- in total income u/s 69. D. For that your appellant craves leave to rely, refer and adduce or modify further ground/grounds at the time of hearing, if necessary.” 2. Before us, the Ld. AR argued that the assessee is a salaried employee of M/s ONGC Ltd., from which he retired and got substantial amounts as retirement benefit (Rs. 57,01,012/-). It has been stated that the assessee had duly sent all the details to his tax consultant who apparently failed to file the return of income. It has been further stated that all amounts were received from the employer and even the investments were made from such receipts only. Also, due to non-filing of return of income, some statutory deductions could also not be claimed by the assessee. The Ld. AR prayed that this matter should be remanded to the file of Ld. AO so that the correct income of the assessee could be determined. 2.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below. 3. We have carefully considered the documents before us and have heard the rival submissions. It is seen that the confusion has arisen firstly, because no return of income has been filed by the assessee and secondly, Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 133/Kol/2025 Tarak Nath Kar because the assessee did not make any compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. AO. However, we are conscious of the fact that the assessee is a retired employee of M/s ONGC Limited and the retirement benefits etc. received by him would be easily verifiable. Accordingly, in the interest of substantive justice, we set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. The assessee would be expected to make a presentation of facts before him. 4. With these remarks, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 24.07.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (George Mathan) (Sanjay Awasthi) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 24.07.2025 AK, Sr. P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Tarak Nath Kar 2 Income Tax Officer, NFAC 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 133/Kol/2025 Tarak Nath Kar Printed from counselvise.com "