BHARGAVA SWAROOP CHITTURI ,HYDERABAD V. ITO., WARD-6(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1335/HYD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Bhargava Swaroop Chitturi, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2018-19. The primary contention was the non-compliance with Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which mandates that the CIT(A)'s order must be in writing, stating the points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for the decision. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) failed to address the merits of the case and dismissed the appeal in limine without proper consideration. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not comply with the statutory requirements and thus set aside the order, remanding the matter back for a fresh assessment on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 46454 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SACHIN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: C. SUBRAHMANYAM
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.1335/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Bhargava Swaroop Chitturi Hyderabad [PAN : AHVPC6343A] Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-6(1) Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍ यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, AR रधजस्‍ व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr.Sachin Kumar, DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 20/02/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement on: 04/03/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 06/12/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi(“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Bhargava Swaroop Chitturi (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2018-19, assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Learned AR submitted that the assessee is not aware of the notices served on him as he is not conversant with the emails or portals. His main plank of argument is that even in the absence of the assessee since the assessment order is available before the learned CIT(A), learned CIT(A) could have proceeded to advert to the merits of the case and disposed of by referring to the various aspects of merits. He, therefore, submits that the provisions under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) are not complied with. 2 3. Though the learned DR vehemently relied on the orders of the Revenue authorities, the fact remains that the learned CIT(A) did not refer to the facts nor did he dispose of the appeals on merits. Even in the absence of the assessee, it is always open for the learned CIT(A) to deal with the matter on merits, instead of dismissing the same in limine. 4. As could be seen from the record, we find that the learned CIT(A) disposed-of the appeals ex-parte, observing that various notices have been issued to the assessee, but the assessee failed to comply with any of such notices nor did the assessee produce any documents, explanation and evidence to substantiate the grounds raised. 5. Requirement of law under section 250 (6) of the Act is that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. Even in the absence of the assessee, it is always open for the learned CIT(A) to deal with the matter on merits instead of dismissing the same in limine. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned orders do not comply with the requirement of Section 250(6) of the Act and cannot be sustained. 7. With this view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh. We direct the assessee to co-operate with the learned CIT(A) in getting the matter disposed of on merits, without seeking any adjournments and the learned CIT(A) to take a fresh look at the matter, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Grounds are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 3 8. In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 4th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 04/03/2025 L.Rama, SPS Copy forwarded to: 1. Shri Bhargava Swaroop Chitturi, H.No.8-3-833, 109, Kamalapuri Colony, Phase 1, Srinagar Colony Extn., Hyderabad 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Hyderabad 3. The Pr.CIT, Hyderabad 4. The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 5. GUARD File TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, HYDERABAD "