Guruva Reddy Kolan, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1403/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8056 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDEEP MEHTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1403/HYD/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Guruva Reddy Kolan, Shamshabad [PAN: ASOPK3522F] Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, AR For Revenue : Shri Sandeep Mehta, DR Date of Hearing : 30-09-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 22-11-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for AY.2014-15 arises from the CIT(A)-2, Hyderabad’s order dated 09-07-2019 passed in case No.10361/2018-19/CIT(A)-2, involving proceedings u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It transpires at the outset that this assessee’s instant appeal suffers from six days delay stated to be attributable to the reason(s) beyond his control as per condonation petition/affidavit. No rebuttal has come from the departmental side. The impugned delay is condoned therefore. ITA No. 1403/Hyd/2019 :- 2 -: 3. We notice during the course of hearing that both the Assessing Officer’s assessment order dt.26-11-2018 as well as the lower appellate order herein had been passed ex-parte. The former one particularly appears to have issued a single notice u/s.142(1) dt.23-10-2018 followed by his “best judgment” assessment followed by the CIT(A)’s order not dealing with the relevant factual matrix u/s.250(6) of the Act requiring framing of profits of determination followed by a detailed discussion. There is further no material in the CIT(A)’s order in para 6.1 that assessee had been actually served the corresponding hearing notice(s). Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant substantive grievance(s) back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh adjudication on merits within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly. 4. This assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 22 nd November, 2021 Sd/- Sd/- ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ( S.S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 22-11-2021 TNMM ITA No. 1403/Hyd/2019 :- 3 -: Copy to : 1.Guruva Reddy Kolan, C/o.Katrapati and Associates, 1-1-298/2/B/3, 1 st Floor, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad. 2.The ITO, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad. 3.CIT(Appeals)-2, Hyderabad. 4.Pr.CIT-2, Hyderabad. 5.D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad. 6.Guard File.