Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
Maa Tara Wines,Murshidabad vs Ito, Ward 56(3),, Kolkata on 20 April, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
KOLKATA 'SMC' BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before
SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
&
SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No(s). 3145/KOL/2025
Assessment Year(s) 2020-21
Maa Tara Wines ITO, Ward-56(3), Murshidabad
Vs.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
PAN: AAUFM6303L
Appearances:
Assessee represented by : None.
Department represented by : Kallol Mistry, Sr. DR.
Date of concluding the hearing : 07-April-2026
Date of pronouncing the order : 20-April-2026
ORDER
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order 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 AY 2020-21 dated 25.04.2024.
2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:
"1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing the order sustaining the addition of Rs.3,92,284/- without appreciating the facts of the case in proper perspective and failed to consider the submission made in course of the appellate proceedings.
2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing the order u/s. 250 without applying his mind properly in considering the facts of the case that the low profit declared by the appellant was not within its control and thereby sustained the addition without giving credence to the explanation made before him.
3. That the appellant craves leave to urge such other ground or Same as above grounds before or at the time of hearing of appeal."
Page | 2 ITA No(s). 3145/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2020-21 Maa Tara Wines.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed the return of income for AY 2020-21 showing total income of ₹9,58,610/- and the case was taken up for complete scrutiny for the reason being 'Low income from TCS receipts-Liquor'. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') issued several notices to the assessee but despite the issue of notices, neither the assessee made any meaningful compliance nor submitted any details. The assessee was required to show cause why the net profit rate of 1.36% should not be applied. The assessee filed response to the show cause notice but no supporting documentary evidence regarding the justification was given and the reply was found to be general in nature. Since the assessee was found to be engaged in the business of wholesale and retail business of liquor, and there was no change in the business the average net profit turnover ratio of 1.36% was adopted as against 0.97% shown by the assessee and a sum of ₹3,92,284/- was added being the difference between the net profit of ₹13,50,892/- computed and the declared net profit of ₹9,58,608/- shown in the return and the total income was assessed at ₹13,50,894/-.
4. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who noted that the Ld. AO had given several opportunities to the assessee requiring the assessee to explain the reason for declaring the low net profit. Although the assessee had responded before the Ld. AO but had failed to substantiate the lower disclosure of net profit and the Ld. CIT(A) noted that when six opportunities were provided by the Ld. AO, the assessee did not submit the justification for lower net profit before the Ld. AO and contended that no reasonable opportunities were given for explaining the lower earning of net profit. Since the assessee did not submit the details, Page | 3 ITA No(s). 3145/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2020-21 Maa Tara Wines.
therefore, relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of T.N. Subash Thangam vs ITO, Non-Corporate, Ward 17(7) reported in 156 Taxmann.com 732 (2023) and the decision given by the Hon'ble ITAT 'G' Bench, New Delhi in the case of SSC Hospitality Private Limited Vs. ITO, Ward 24(2), New Delhi in ITA No.2691/Del/2019 order dated 28.11.2023, the failure on the part of the assessee to prove the lower profit earned at the time of assessment, the Ld. CIT(A) observed that there was merit in the addition made by the Ld. AO and accordingly the grounds raised were dismissed and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.
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 nor any application seeking adjournment was filed before us and the case was heard with the assistance of the Ld. DR. The Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 172 days. The assessee has filed a petition seeking condonation of delay explaining the reasons that the assessee communicated the appellate order passed u/s 250 of the Act dated 25.04.2024 to its Chartered Accountant but due to some internal problems amongst the partners, no steps could be taken by the assessee in filing the appeal before the ITAT within time. Afterwards, due to law- and-order problem prevailing at that point of time in and around Murshidabad District, internet was suspended/interrupted for almost 30 days. The assessee has requested the Bench to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. It is noted that the assessee has not filed any affidavit in support of the application seeking condonation of delay. Although in the application for condonation of Page | 4 ITA No(s). 3145/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2020-21 Maa Tara Wines.
delay, it is mentioned that due to some internal problems amongst the partners of the appellant/petitioner, no steps could be taken by the appellant/petitioner in filing the appeal before the Tribunal within the due date of filing the appeal even though the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was handed over to the Chartered Accountant in the month of April, 2025; however no affidavit in this regard has been filed and the reasons are found to be vague and general in nature and do not amount to sufficient cause. It is also mentioned that due to law-and-order problem which prevailed at that time in and around of district of Murshidabad (W.B.) in the months of April, 2025 and May, 2025 the internet was suspended/interrupted for almost 30 days, therefore, the assessee could not take any steps in filing the appeal before us. General reason for sickness of the Counsel has also been mentioned and the application seeking condonation of delay is filed by the Chartered Accountant L. Ray and not by the assessee. The application has also not justified the sufficient cause for the delay of 172 days in filing the appeal as the reasons are vague and general in nature and not supported by any affidavit.
6. We have heard the Ld. DR who supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) by saying that the same is a reasoned order. Since the assessee has not filed the appeal before the Tribunal in time as the order was served upon the assessee on 26.04.2024 whereas the appeal was filed on 19.12.2025 and there are also defects in the appeal memo which also apparently have not been corrected. Since the appeal is delayed and there is no justification for the delay nor any sufficient cause has been made out before us as to why the appeal was filed delayed, therefore, the delay in filing the appeal is not condoned and the appeal is liable to be dismissed on account of delay alone. Since the appeal is not Page | 5 ITA No(s). 3145/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2020-21 Maa Tara Wines.
maintainable, hence the same is dismissed and the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby confirmed.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 20th April, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/-
[Sonjoy Sarma] [Rakesh Mishra]
Judicial Member Accountant Member
Dated: 20.04.2026
Bidhan (Sr. P.S.)
Page | 6
ITA No(s). 3145/KOL/2025
Assessment Year(s) 2020-21
Maa Tara Wines.
Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Maa Tara Wines, 29, A.C. Road, Indraprastha, Khagra, Berhampore, Murshidabad, West Bengal, 742103.
2. ITO, Ward-56(3), Murshidabad.
3. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi.
4. CIT-
5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.
6. Guard File.
//True copy // By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata