Biradmal Lodha (HUF), Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1093/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7103 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 15-10-2019
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEV BENJWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P MURALI MOHAN RAO
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 201; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER S.NO. ITA NO. AY APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1 1 0 93 /H/19 2010 - 11 BIRA D M AL LODHA (HUF), HYDERABAD. PAN - AACHB 1320E INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 10(2), HYDERABAD. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P. MURALI MOHAN RAO REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJEEV BENJWAL DATE OF HEARING : 1 5 /10/2019 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 / 1 0 /201 9 . O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J . M .: TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( A ) - 12 , HYDERABAD, DATED 18/07/2017 FOR AY 2010 - 11. 2. BR IEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY 2010 - 11 ON 02/04/2011 ADMITTING AN INCOME OF RS. 1,50,380/ - . SUBSEQUENTLY, T HE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND ACCORDINGLY, STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE TO THE SAID NOTICES, THE AO PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT EX - PARTE U/S 144 BY CONSIDERING THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 2.1 THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CASH DEPOSITS FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS. 15,65,000/ - IN THE KARUR VYASYA BANK CHENNAI AND THE SAME WERE ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 2 ITA NO. 1093 /H/1 8 BIRADMAL LODHA (HUF), HYD. 3. WHEN THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL B EFORE THE CIT(A), T HE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING THAT TH OUGH SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN TO ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR FOR ANY HEARING AFTER DUE SERVICE OF NOTICES, HENCE, NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL . T O COME TO THE SAID CONCLUSION, HE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.M. BHATTACHARJEE, 118 ITR 461 (SC). 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, TH E ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN - LIMINE WITHOUT GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT ADJUDICATING THE GROUNDS ON MERITS. 6 . REFERRING TO THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE LEAR NED CIT(A) DECIDED THE MATTER EX - PARTE AND, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR DECIDING VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON MERITS. THE LEARNED DR OBJECTED TO THE AFORESAID STATEMENT OF THE LEARNED AR. 7 . CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT INTEREST OF JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR DECIDING VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MER ITS. ACCORDINGLY, THE CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO AFFORD REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 3 ITA NO. 1093 /H/1 8 BIRADMAL LODHA (HUF), HYD. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER P RONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON TH IS 23 RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 201 9 . SD/ - SD/ - (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ( V. DURGA RAO ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED : 23 RD OCTOBER , 201 9 . KV COPY TO: 1. BIRADMAL LODHA, HUF, C/O CA RAJU SINGHVI, CAS., 3 - 6 - 661 & 662, FLAT NO. 404, SAI SANDHYA APARTMENTS, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYD. 500 029 2. ITO, WARD 10(2), HYDERABAD. 3. CIT(A) - 12 , HYDERABAD. 4. PR. CIT VI, HYD. 5. THE D.R ., ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.