Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Gauhati
Silchar Collegiate School,Silchar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Silchar on 18 May, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
GUWAHATI 'DB' BENCH AT KOLKATA
[Virtual Court]
Before
SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
&
SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No(s). 33 & 34/GTY/2026
Assessment Year(s) 2015-16 & 2016-17
Silchar Collegiate School ITO, Ward-1, Silchar
Vs.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
PAN: AAKAS9310G
Appearances:
Assessee represented by : Adj. petition.
Department represented by : Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT.
Date of concluding the hearing : 05-May-2026
Date of pronouncing the order : 18-May-2026
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)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for AYs 2015-16 and 2016- 17 dated 14.11.2025. The assessee sought adjournment but since there was no justification for seeking the adjournment, therefore, the same was rejected and the appeal was heard with the assistance of the Ld. DR.
1.1 Since the issues in both the appeals are related, they 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:
Page | 2 ITA No(s). 33 & 34/GTY/2026 AY(s) 2015-16 & 2016-17 Silchar Collegiate School.
I. ITA No. 33/GTY/2026:
"1. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the order of reassessment passed by learned Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (AO) under section 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) on 09.02.2024 for the Assessment Year 2015-16 is bad in law, facts and procedure.
2. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the notice under section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2015-16 having been digitally signed on 02.05.2022 and issued thereafter, the same is time barred and bad in law and consequently, the related order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed.
3. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that notice dated 29.04.2022, digitally signed on 02.05.2022 and issued thereafter under section 148 of the Act by the Id. JAO is in breach of the scheme notified under section 151A of the Act, the same is not in accordance with the law and consequently, the related order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed.
4. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the Show-Cause Notice (SCN) dated 23.03.2022 issued under section 148A(b) of the Act requiring compliance on 29.03.2022 & also on 28.03.2022 is not in accordance with the law, self-contradictory, vague and without application of mind and consequently, the related order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed.
5. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the SCN u/s 148A(b) of the Act having been issued by the Id. AO without making due enquiries, without application of any mind and apparently on an erroneous premise, without satisfying the pre-requisite jurisdictional conditions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act, the same is bad in law and consequently, the related order of re-
assessment is bad in law.
6. For that in absence of result of enquiry conducted under section 148A(a) having been informed to the assessee in the SCN issued under section 148A(b), precisely and clearly, the said SCN is vague and not in accordance with the law and consequently, violates the principles of natural justice and bad in law and hence, the impugned order of re-assessment is unsustainable.
7. For that the order dated 20.04.2022 under section 148A(d) of the Act having been passed in a casual manner, describing the assessee as an individual, without application of due mind by the ld. AO and ignoring the materials available on record and exceeding SCN and in violation of principles of natural justice, therefore, the same is bad in law and untenable.
Page | 3 ITA No(s). 33 & 34/GTY/2026 AY(s) 2015-16 & 2016-17 Silchar Collegiate School.
8. For that in absence of any valid approval having been obtained from the competent authority under section 151 of the Act for order under section 148A(d) of the Act, for issuing SCN under section 148A(b) and for issuing Notice under section 148 of the Act, after due application of mind by the approving authority, the related order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and vitiated.
9. For that in absence of any notice issued under section 148 having been served upon the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and bad in law.
10. i) For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that that the ld. AO erred in arbitrarily adding Rs. 2,73,22,343/- on account of alleged aggregate amount of deposits in various banks to the income of the assessee by invoking provisions of section 69A of the Act, without properly appreciating the facts of the case.
ii) For that the aforesaid addition being in excess of jurisdiction under section 69A of the Act, the same is bad in law and untenable.
11. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have held that the ld. AO erred both on the facts and in law in arbitrarily adding Rs. 4,01,935/- as interest.
12. For that the Id. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the order of re-assessment having been passed by the ld. AO in gross violation of principles of natural justice, the same is liable to be quashed.
13. For that the impugned order has been passed by the ld. CIT(A) without allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the same is untenable.
14. For that the appellant craves leave of your honour to take additional ground or grounds of appeal and/or to modify or resign any ground(s) of appeal before or at the time of hearing."
II. ITA No. 34/GTY/2026:
"1. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the order of reassessment passed by learned Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (AO) under section 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) on 26.03.2024 for the Assessment Year 2016-17 is bad in law, facts and procedure.
2. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that notice dated 27.03.2023, digitally signed on 28.03.2023 and issued thereafter under section 148 of the Act by the ld. JAO is in breach of the scheme notified under section 151A of the Act, the same is not in accordance with the law and consequently, the related order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed.
Page | 4 ITA No(s). 33 & 34/GTY/2026 AY(s) 2015-16 & 2016-17 Silchar Collegiate School.
3. For that in absence of any valid approval, signed by approving authority, having been obtained from the competent authority under section 151 of the Act for passing order under section 148A(d) of the Act, after due application of mind by the approving authority, the related order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and vitiated.
4. For that the order dated 27.03.2023 under section 148A(d) of the Act having been passed in a casual manner, describing the assessee as an individual, without application of due mind by the ld. AO and ignoring the materials available on record and exceeding SCN and in violation of principles of natural justice, therefore, the same is bad in law and untenable and also shows no valid approval, after application of mind, under section 151 of the Act was obtained.
5. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the Show-Cause Notice (SCN) dated 06.03.2023 issued under section 148A(b) of the Act requiring compliance on 14.03.2023 & also 'within 7 days of receipt of this letter' is not in accordance with the law, self-contradictory, vague and without application of mind and consequently, the related order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed.
6. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the SCN u/s 148A(b) of the Act having been issued by the ld. AO without making due enquiries, without application of any mind and apparently on an erroneous premise, without satisfying the pre-requisite jurisdictional conditions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act, the same is bad in law and consequently, the related order of re-
assessment is bad in law.
7. For that in absence of result of enquiry conducted under section 148A(a) having been informed to the assessee in the SCN issued under section 148A(b), precisely and clearly, the said SCN is vague and not in accordance with the law and consequently, violates the principles of natural justice and bad in law and hence, the impugned order of re-assessment is unsustainable.
8. For that in absence of any notice issued under section 148 having been served upon the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the order of re-assessment is without jurisdiction and bad in law.
9. i) For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that that the ld. AO erred in arbitrarily adding Rs. 2,41,29,413/- on account of alleged aggregate amount of deposits in various banks to the income of the assessee by invoking provisions of section 69A of the Act, without properly appreciating the facts of the case.
ii) For that the aforesaid addition being in excess of jurisdiction under section 69A of the Act, the same is bad in law and untenable.
Page | 5 ITA No(s). 33 & 34/GTY/2026 AY(s) 2015-16 & 2016-17 Silchar Collegiate School.
10. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have held that the Id. AO erred both on the facts and in law in arbitrarily adding Rs. 4,10,677/- as interest.
11. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the ld. AO was not justified in not granting credit for prepaid tax by way of ITDS.
12. For that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have hold that the order of re-assessment having been passed by the Id. AO in gross violation of principles of natural justice, the same is liable to be quashed.
13. For that the impugned order has been passed by the ld. CIT(A) without allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the same is untenable.
14. For that the appellant craves leave of your honour to take additional ground or grounds of appeal and/or to modify or resign any ground(s) of appeal before or at the time of hearing."
3. We shall first take up ITA No. 33/GTY/2026 for adjudication. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an AOP and had not filed the return of income for AY 2015-16. The case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act after recording reasons and accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. In response to the notice, the assessee did not file the return of income. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') observed that the assessee had deposited cash to the extent of ₹1,87,24,100/- in its savings bank account maintained with the United Bank of India. The Ld. AO issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act which was not complied with by the assessee. Further, in response to the show cause notice, the assessee neither complied nor furnished any documents before the Ld. AO during the assessment proceedings. In absence of documentary evidences and information available on record, the Ld. AO observed that the assessee had deposited cash of ₹2,46,28,100/- and had a credit/transaction of ₹26,94,243/- in its bank account maintained with United Bank of India. Further, it was observed that the assessee had received interest income of ₹4,01,935/-. Since, the assessee remained Page | 6 ITA No(s). 33 & 34/GTY/2026 AY(s) 2015-16 & 2016-17 Silchar Collegiate School.
non-compliant after giving ample opportunities, the Ld. AO treated the total amount of cash deposits and credits of ₹2,73,22,343/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and ₹4,01,935/- as income from other sources. Accordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act on 09.02.2024 by computing the total income of the assessee at ₹2,77,24,278/- and thereby raised a demand of ₹2,91,18,390/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued four notices for hearing to the assessee but the assessee remained non-compliant. The Ld. CIT(A) has cited the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another (118 ITR 461) and Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009 and accordingly dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-compliance.
4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal.
5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and the case was heard with the assistance of the Ld. DR.
6. We have considered the submissions made, gone through the facts of the case and perused the record and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Since there was no proper compliance before both the Ld. AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A), in the interest of justice and fair play it was considered that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee to present its case properly and the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and the issue may be remanded before the Ld. AO so that a proper opportunity of being heard may be provided. Hence, after examining the facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld. Page | 7 ITA No(s). 33 & 34/GTY/2026 AY(s) 2015-16 & 2016-17 Silchar Collegiate School.
CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the Ld. AO for making the reassessment de novo. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission it wants to make in support of its grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Accordingly, the grounds taken by the assessee in the appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
7. Now, we shall take up ITA No. 34/GTY/2026 for adjudication. Since the facts in this appeal are identical, our findings in ITA No. 33/GTY/2026 shall mutatis mutandis also apply in the appeal in ITA No. 34/GTY/2026. Therefore, the grounds taken by the assessee in this appeal are also partly allowed for statistical purposes.
8. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 18th May, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/-
[Sonjoy Sarma] [Rakesh Mishra]
Judicial Member Accountant Member
Dated: 18.05.2026
Bidhan (Sr. P.S.)
Page | 8
ITA No(s). 33 & 34/GTY/2026
AY(s) 2015-16 & 2016-17
Silchar Collegiate School.
Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Silchar Collegiate School, R K Mission Road, Silchar, Assam, 788003.
2. ITO, Ward-1, Silchar.
3. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi.
4. CIT-
5. CIT(DR), Guwahati Benches, Guwahati.
6. Guard File.
//True copy // By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata