IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM (Assessment Year: 2011-12)

Gulmohar Towers Private Limited Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(2)

Room No.105, 1^st Floor, 7, Aaykar Bhawan, Kolkata-700069 Mangoe Lane, Surendra Mohan Vs.

West Bengal Ghosh Sara, Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Appellant) (

Respondent)

PAN No. AACCG9168L Assessee by : Shri S. Jhajharia, AR Revenue by : Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR Date of hearing: 04.11.2025 Date of pronouncement: 02.02.2026

O R D E R

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 10.102024 for the AY 2011-12.

2. At the time of hearing, we observe from the appeal folder that there is a delay of 126 days for which the condonation petition along with affidavit was filed. The counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal by referring to the affidavit of the assessee which was due to the rectification petition filed before ld.

CIT(A) for non-disposal of ground no. 1 on legal issue but the same was rejected. The Ld. D.R did raise any objection to the condoning the delay on the ground that this is not the reasonable cause for late filing of appeal. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal in the ensuing paras.

3. The only issue raised in ground no.1 is against invalid reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act made by the AO. The assessee has also assailed the order of ld. CIT (A) simply setting aside the issue to the file of the ld. AO without deciding the same on merit.

3.1. The facts in brief are that the assessee is a private limited company and has filed the return of income on 26.09.2011, declaring total income at ₹12,23,346/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 11.01.2012. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to “the Act”) by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2018, on the ground that the income chargeable to tax amounting to ₹43,32,00,000/- has escaped assessment. The assessee complied with the said notice issued u/s 148 of the Act by filing the return of income and also requested the ld. AO to supply the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment. The reasons were accordingly supplied by the ld. AO to the assessee. The case of the assessee was reopened after the ld. AO received information from the investigation wing that Shri Anand Sharma, was involved in giving accommodation entries through paper/ shell companies of which assessee is one of the beneficiaries. The ld. AO received information that Shri Anand Sharma has been giving accommodation entries in the form of sale of shares which were purchased by various companies, managed and controlled by said operator. The AO was issued the questionnaire during the course of assessment proceedings which was not complied with by the assessee resulting into passing the ex-parte order by the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. AO on the basis of available information added the entire amount of sale consideration received by the assessee from sale of shares/ investments amounting to ₹43,32,00,000, which according to the ld. AO was arranged by Shri Anand Sharma an entry operator.

3.2. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) restored the issue to the file of the ld. AO without deciding the legal as well as the issue on merit despite the assessee furnishing all the details and documents before the ld. appellate authority.

3.3. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the reopening of assessment has been made by the ld. AO u/s 147 of the Act by recording the reasons to believe u/s 148(2) of the Act which are extracted below for the