Sridhar Rao Maroju , Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1014/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0846 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-12-2019
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 18-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NILANJAN DEY
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 201; 264; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH SMC , HYDERABAD SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1014 /HYD/201 9 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 0 - 11 SRIDHAR RAO MAROJU, HY DERABAD. PAN ACAPM 9634 L VS. INCOME - TAX OFFICER , WARD 9 (1), HYDERABAD. ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI A.V. RAGHURAM REVENUE BY : SHRI NILANJAN DEY DATE OF HEARING : 0 2 / 1 2 /201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 / 1 2 / 201 9 O R D E R T H IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) 7 , DATED 28 / 05 / 201 9 , HYDERABAD FOR AY 20 1 0 - 1 1 . 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE, AN INDIVIDUAL, FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2010 - 11 ON 26/02/2011 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 5,31,480/ - . SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND THE AO HAS ISSUED STATUTORY NOTICES AS PER LAW. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE STATUTORY NOTICES AND FURNISH THE INFORMATION. THE AO, THEREFORE, PASSED AN EX - PARTE ORDER U/S 144 OF THE IT ACT ON 18/03/2013 DETERMINING THE ASSESSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 24,52,480/ - BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 19,21,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITS TR EATING THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 2 ITA NO. 1014 /HYD/1 9 SRIDHAR RAO MAROJU, HYD. 3. THE ASSESSEE FILED A PETITION U/S 264 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE CIT - VI, HYDERABAD, DATED 30/09/2013, WHO NEITHER DISMISSED THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE NOR ADJUDICATED THE SAME ON MERITS. 4. T HEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF WROTE A LETTER TO PR. CIT 7, HYDERABAD, DATED 20/06/2018, STATING THEREIN THAT HE MAY BE PERMITTED TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL, SO AS TO ENABLE TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE PR. CIT DID NOT TAKE ANY ACTION ON THIS LETTER. 5. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WITH A DELAY OF 1887 DAYS. THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN - LIMINE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN REASONS FOR CONDONATION OF THE SAID DELAY. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AS WELL AS GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF REVENUE AUTHORITIES. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO U/S 144 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE CIT - VI ON ACCOUNT OF WRONG ADVICE FROM T HE TAX CONSULTANT. THE LD. CIT NEITHER REJECTED THE APPEAL NOR ADJUDICATED THE SAME ON MERITS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF WROTE A LETTER TO PR. CIT 7, HYD SEEKING PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL WITH A CONDITION THAT HE MAY BE PERMITTED TO APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). AGAINST THIS LETTER, THE PR. CIT HAS NOT PASSED ANY ORDER. WE FIND THAT THE DELAY CAUSED BECAUSE OF NON - ACTION BY THE CIT - VI AND PR. CIT - 7 AND ULTIMATELY, THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS WITHDRAWN THE APPEAL AND APPROACHED THE CIT(A) AND IN THI S PROCESS, THERE WAS A HUGE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). 6.1 CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED WRONG AUTHORITY INSTEAD OF APPROACHING THE CIT(A) AND, THEREFORE, IN MY OPINION, TH ERE IS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE 3 ITA NO. 1014 /HYD/1 9 SRIDHAR RAO MAROJU, HYD. CIT(A). THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY DETAILS BEFORE THE AO, HE WANTED TO FILE ALL THE DETAILS BEFORE THE CIT(A). NON CONSIDERATION OF CONDONATION OF DELAY, THE CIT(A) C AUSED INJUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE BY NOT ADJUDICATING THE APPEAL ON MERITS. THEREFORE, I CONDONE THE DELAY OF 1887 DAYS AND REMIT THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING REAS ONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. IF NECESSARY, A REMAND REPORT MAY BE CALLED FROM THE AO . THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM BY FURNISHING THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE CIT(A). 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH DECEMBER , 201 9 . SD/ - ( V. DURGA RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 19 TH DECEMBER , 201 9 KV C OPY TO: - 1) SRI SRIDHAR RAO MAROJU, FLAT NO. 610, 6 TH FLOOR, BABUKHAN ESTATE, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD 500 001 2) IT O , WARD 9 ( 1 ), HYDERABAD. 3) CIT(A) 7 , HYDERABAD. 4) PR. CIT - 7 , HYD. 5 ) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD. 6 ) GUARD FILE