WELFARE BUILDINGS & ESTATES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA V. DCIT, CPC, , BENGALURU

ITA 252/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Welfare Building & Estates Private Limited appealing against an order under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which resulted in an addition of Rs. 1,48,83,791 under sections 43B and 36(i)(va) of the Act. The assessee contended that this addition was a double addition and challenged the validity of the order, claiming it was not properly signed. The Departmental Representative (DR) argued that the order was digitally signed and thus valid. However, the tribunal found the order to be unsigned in a legally valid manner, leading to its quashing and the allowance of the assessee's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711431 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 154; 43B

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. 252/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-2022 Welfare Building & Estates Private Limited, 126/1, Rabindra Pally, Khardah - 700117 [PAN: AAACW3972E] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru, DCIT, Centralized Processing Center-1, Electronic City Post Office, Bengaluru - 560100 ................................. Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : A.N. Keshari, FCA 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 17.12.2024, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. 1.1 In this case, the first issue is that the assessee is aggrieved with an order passed u/s 154 of the Act by the Ld. AO-CPC through which an addition of Rs. 1,48,83,791/- has been made u/s 43B and 36(i)(va) of the Act. The assessee has all along claimed that this is a double addition which has been wrongly made. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal on the basis of findings given in para 4.4 of the impugned order. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 252/Kol/2025 Welfare Building & Estate Pvt. Ltd. 1.2 Aggrieved with this action, the assessee has filed the present appeal with grounds challenging the adjustments made by the AO-CPC. The Ld. AR also pointed out that the Ld. AO’s order is not properly signed and hence that order itself is invalid. The Ld. AR stated that the action of Ld. AO has resulted in double addition and the assessee’s averments have not been considered. 1.2 The Ld. DR pointed out that there were shortcomings in terms of documentation regarding the adjustments made. The Ld. DR pointed out that the Ld. AO’s order is digitally signed and hence it cannot be said that the order is unsigned. The Ld. DR relied on the impugned order thereafter. 2. We have carefully considered the documents before us and heard both the Ld. AR/DR. There appeals to be considerable merit in the averment that the order u/s 154 of the Act is not signed. For this purpose, the only page where there is any signature visible deserves to be extracted: Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 252/Kol/2025 Welfare Building & Estate Pvt. Ltd. 2.1 It is seen that on the bottom, right side of the copy of document pasted above reveals that there is a mention: “Signature invalid”, and it is written N Sayiraj, IRS, DDIT, CPC-Bengaluru. It is obvious that the Ld. AO’s order is not signed and legally an unsigned order has no validity in the eyes of law. Thus, on this ground itself, the Ld. AO’s order is quashed. However, Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 252/Kol/2025 Welfare Building & Estate Pvt. Ltd. we have considered the fact of signature or otherwise purely on the basis of records before us, however, in case a valid signature is available elsewhere then the Revenue may move an appropriate order for rectification in this matter. In result, with the discussion above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 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. Welfare Building & Estate Pvt. Ltd. 2 DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No. 252/Kol/2025 Welfare Building & Estate Pvt. Ltd. Printed from counselvise.com "