IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA [Virtual Court]

Before SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.: 256 & 257/GTY/2024 Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Bhagya Kalita ACIT, Central Circle-1, Vs. Guwahati (Appellant) (Respondent)

PAN: AEJPK6947H Appearances:

Assessee represented by : S.P. Bhati, FCA.

Department represented by : Kausik Ray, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : 02-July-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 29-September-2025

ORDER

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

Both these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Central NER, Guwahati [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2020- 21 and 2021-22 dated 08.11.2024, which have been passed against the penalty orders u/s 271AAB of the Act, dated 20.09.2022, for both the years. Since the issues are common, both the appeals were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:

ITA No. 256/GTY/2024 “1. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. was not justified in levying penalty u/s 271AAB of I.T. Act, 1961 in as much as it is not specified previous year.

2. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal.”

ITA No. 257/GTY/2024 “1. For that under the facts & circumstances of the case, learned A.O. was not justified in levying penalty u/s 271AAB of I.T. Act, 1961.

2. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal.”

3. We shall first take up the appeal for A.Y. 2020-21. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual having income from contract business and house property and had filed the return of income for the AY 2020-21 u/s 139(1) of the Act showing total income of ₹11,46,33,570/-. A search and seizure action under section 132(1) of the Act was conducted on 22.12.2020 at the residential and business premises of the assessee belonging to ‘Contractors Group’. Subsequent to the notice issued u/s 153A of the Act, the return of income for the above assessment year was filed on 29.11.2021 showing total income of ₹11,46,00,570/-, the case was taken up under scrutiny and the assessee submitted to the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') the details called for and also produced the books of account from time to time. The assessee had disclosed the income form house property at the time of statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act on the basis of some documents related to the rental income, which were found and seized during the course of the search which was subsequently disclosed in the return of income filed in response to the notice issued u/s 153A of the Act. The Ld. AO assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹11,46,33,570/- u/s 153A of the Act and also held that as during the search operation various incriminating documents were found, out of which some documents related to the sum of ₹1,70,00,000/- as the undisclosed the rental income, hence he inferred that the assessee had concealed his income for the year under consideration by not disclosing the income which was later disclosed during the search action and accordingly penalty u/s 271AAB of ₹51,00,000/- was imposed. Aggrieved with the penalty order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who, vide order dated

08.11.2024, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal.

5. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined. The Ld. AR submitted that consequent to the search and seizure action the assessee had d