AGRAS RESIDENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD V. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1159/HYD/2025

AI Insights

M/s. Agras Residency Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had dismissed their earlier appeal ex parte due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee contended that they did not receive proper notice from the CIT(A) as their provided email address was not used. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not adequately notified and thus deserved another opportunity to present their case. The Departmental Representative did not object to the remand of the case but noted the assessee's non-compliance at earlier stages.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775686 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SACHIN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: P. VINOD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause; Reassessment proceedings; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 68

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री विजय पाल राि, उपाध् यक्ष एिं श्री मिुसूदन सािडिया, लेखा सदस् य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1159/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) M/s. Agras Residency Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN:AAFCA9138F Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri P. Vinod, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 10/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/09/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M. : This appeal is filed by M/s. Agras Residency Pvt. Ltd. (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 10.03.2025 for the A.Y. 2013-14. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1159/Hyd/2025 2 2. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 45 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay accompanied by an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that in Form No.35, the assessee had specifically provided its e-mail address as [e-mail]. However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not issue notices to the said e-mail ID. As a result, the assessee was not aware of the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) and could not know about the passing of the appellate order in time. The Ld. AR contended that as soon as the assessee came to know about the passing of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), it immediately made arrangements for filing the appeal before this Tribunal. Thus, the delay of 45 days was caused due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. He submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional, and therefore prayed for condonation of the delay. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1159/Hyd/2025 3 3. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) did not raise any serious objection to the prayer of the assessee for condonation of delay. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. The explanation offered by the assessee for the delay in filing of the appeal appears to be bona fide. In the absence of any contrary material brought by the Revenue, we are of the view that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Accordingly, taking a liberal approach, we condone the delay of 45 days in filing of the appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merits. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1159/Hyd/2025 4 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2013–14 on 30.09.2013, declaring a total loss of Rs.40,91,994/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), and a notice under section 148 was issued on 31.03.2021. The assessee did not file any return of income in response to the said notice and also failed to comply with the subsequent notices issued by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) during the reassessment proceedings. Consequently, the Ld. AO completed the assessment under section 147 read with section Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1159/Hyd/2025 5 144 of the Act on 28.03.2022 by making an addition of Rs.32 lakhs under section 68 of the Act. 7. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the assessee again failed to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). As a result, the appeal was dismissed ex parte. 8. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that in Form No.35, the assessee had clearly provided its e-mail address as [e-mail]. However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not issue notices to the said e-mail address, and therefore, the assessee could not receive the notices and could not appear before the appellate authority. He contended that the appeal was thus dismissed for non- prosecution without affording adequate opportunity. The Ld. AR submitted that the non-compliance was not deliberate or intentional but occurred due to reasons beyond the control of the assessee. Accordingly, he prayed for one more opportunity to prosecute the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1159/Hyd/2025 6 case on merits. He requested that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 9. Per contra, the Ld. DR fairly submitted that he does not have any objection if the matter is remanded. However, he pointed out that even before the Ld. AO, the assessee remained ex parte. Therefore, he prayed that in the interest of justice, the issue may be restored to the file of the Ld. AO instead of the Ld. CIT(A). 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee did not comply with the notices both before the Ld. AO as well as before the Ld. CIT(A). At the same time, the assessee has demonstrated that the notices from the Ld. CIT(A) were not properly served on the e-mail address provided in Form 35. Considering the principles of natural justice and in view of the submissions of both parties, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present its case. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of the Ld. AO. The Ld. AO is directed Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1159/Hyd/2025 7 to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to present its case and file necessary evidences in support of its claim. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation during the assessment proceedings and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12th Sept., 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad. Dated: 12.09.2025. * Reddy gp Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. M/s. Agras Residency Pvt. Ltd., 5-9-208, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, Hyderabad-500 001 2. The DCIT, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. 3. Pr.CIT, Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, Printed from counselvise.com "