Murali Krishna Gopi, Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-12(1), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 144/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 14422514 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMAKRISHNA BANDI
• Assessee Lawyers: T CHAITANYA KUMAR
• Keywords: Salary income

Judgement Text

ITA NO.144 OF 2015 MURALI KRISHNA GOPI HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT.ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 144/HYD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) SHRI MURALI KRISHNA GOPI HYDERABAD PAN: AIWPG 5836 E VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 12(1) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI T. CHAITANYA KUMAR FOR REVENUE : SHRI RAMAKRISHNA BANDI, DR DATE OF HEARING : 13.05.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 .05.20 15 O R D E R PER SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT (A) II, HYDERABAD DATED 29.09.2 014 RELATING TO A.Y 2010-11. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE HEREIN IS AN INDIVI DUAL DERIVING INCOME FROM SALARY AND FILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR A .Y 2010-11 ON 06.07.2010 ADMITTING INCOME OF RS.5,71,798. HE HAD INCOME FROM SALARY AND OTHER SOURCES. THE SCRUTINY ASSESSM ENT WAS COMPLETED DETERMINING THE INCOME AT RS.31,63,810 BY MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: (I) UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK A/C RS.25, 91,000 (II) INTEREST INCOME RS. 1,008 ITA NO.144 OF 2015 MURALI KRISHNA GOPI HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 4 3. THE DETAILS OF POSTING IN THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: VIDE LETTER DATED 24.04.2014 THE CASE WAS POSTED FO R HEARING ON 21.05.2014 AND THE SAID NOTICE WAS SERVE D ON THE ASSESSEE ON 28.04.2014. NONE APPEARED ON THE SAID DATE. HOWEVER, AN ADJOURNMENT LETTER WAS FILED BY THE A.R STATING THAT THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ARE UNDER PREPARATION. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 05.06.2014 AND THE SAME WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE A.R. AGAIN NONE APPEARED ON 5.6.2014 AND ADJOURNMENT LETTER WAS FILED ON THE SAME DATE STATI NG THAT INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REPRESENTING THE MATT ER COULD NOT BE COLLECTED FROM THE C.A WHO WAS OUT OF STATION. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 29.07.2014 AS REQUESTED BY THE AR. NONE APPEARED ON 29.07.2014. THE CASE WAS POSTED FOR HEARING AGAIN ON 20.08.2014 , NONE APPEARED AND ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT FOR . 4. SINCE THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE, A PPEAL WAS DECIDED ON MERITS BY THE LD CIT (A) WITH THE HELP O F THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING ASSESS MENT PROCEEDINGS. 5. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND P REFERRED THE FOLLOWING THE GROUNDS: 1. THE ORDER OF CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE CIT (A) ERRED IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL WIT HOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT PARTICULARLY WHEN THE APPELLANT FILED ADJOURNMENT L ETTER FILED BEFORE THE CIT (A). 3. THE CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO WITHOUT CONSIDERING ANY OF THE EVIDENCES FIL ED BEFORE THE AO AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING ANY OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE THE CIT (A). 4. THE CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT DEPOSITS MADE INTO BANK ACCOUNT AMOUNTS RECEIVED FROM THE FOLLOWING PERSONS: ITA NO.144 OF 2015 MURALI KRISHNA GOPI HYDERABAD. PAGE 3 OF 4 A) G. GANGADHARA RAO - RS.3 LAKHS B) AYYAPPA RAJU - RS.3 LAKHS C) SMT. GOPI SURYAKANTHAM- RS.6 LAKHS D) SMT. G.J.ANITHA DEVI - RS.5 LAKHS 5. THE CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MAD E BY THE AO OF RS.25,91,000 ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 6. THE CIT (A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 6. IN GROUND NO.1 AND 2, ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT TO OU R NOTICE THAT THE CIT (A) HAS DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL WITHOU T PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, EVEN WHEN THE A SSESSEE FILED ADJOURNMENT LETTER BEFORE THE CIT (A), THE CIT (A) HAD NOT GRANTED THE TIME ON 20.08.2014. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ARGUED BEFORE US THAT THE CIT (A) HAS NOT CONSIDERE D ANY EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE AO NOR WAS THE CIT (A) M ADE AWARE OF THE FACTS AS THE LD COUNSEL DID NOT REPRESENT BEFOR E THE CIT (A). IT WAS STATED THAT THE CIT (A) IGNORED THE ADJOURNMENT LETTER AND PROCEEDED TO DECIDE THE CASE ON MERITS EX PARTE IGNORING THE INPUT WHICH THE ASSESSEE WOULD HAVE PLACED BEFORE T HE CIT (A) HAD HE BEEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT.. 7. WE FIND THAT THE CIT (A) WAS INCLINED TO DISMISS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AS ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS AS POINTE D OUT BY THE LD CIT (A), NONE APPEARED FOR THE HEARING POSTED ON 21.5.2014 TO 5.6.14, 29.7.14. THE CIT (A) WAS OF THE OPINION TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAD UTTER DISREGARD FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION AND RIGH TLY SO. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, SINCE THE LD C OUNSEL HAS NOW PLEADED THAT AN OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO HIM TO PRESENT ITA NO.144 OF 2015 MURALI KRISHNA GOPI HYDERABAD. PAGE 4 OF 4 HIS CASE AND HAS UNDERTAKEN TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CI T (A) WITH ALL THE DETAILS, WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) TO GIVE THE ASSESSEE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY AND DECIDE THE IS SUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH MAY, 2015. S D/ - S D/ - (P.M. JAGTAP) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 15 TH MAY, 2015. VNODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1. SHRI T. CHAITANYA KUMAR, FLAT 409, METRO RESIDENCY, RAJBHAVAN ROAD, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDFERABAD 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 12(1) HYDERABAD 3. CIT(A)-II HYDERABAD 4. CIT I HYDERABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER