Veera Venkata Ramana Badarla, Secunderabad, Secunderabad V. ACIT, Circle-10(1), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 1552/HYD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4870 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K N SURESH BABU
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 234B; 69; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A , HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) ITA NO. 1552/HYD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 SHRI VEERA VENKATA RAMANA BADARLA, SECUNDERABAD - 500 009. PAN: AEVPB 6462 J VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI PAWAN KUMAR CHAKR A PANI REVENUE BY: SHRI K.N. SURESH BABU, DR DATE OF HEARING: 08/10/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12/10/2020 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) - 8, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 0078/CIT (A) - 8/HYD/2015 - 16, DATED 11 TH AUGUST, 2016 PASSED U/S. 144 R.W.S 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2008 - 09. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS IN HIS APPEAL WITH RESPECT TO JURISDICTION, ADDITION DUE TO UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS AND LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 2 3 . AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE ME THAT THE LD. AO HAD PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER U/S. 144 OF THE ACT WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND MADE ADDITION OF RS. 77,50,060/ - AS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS U/S. 69 OF THE ACT. IT WAS F URTHER SUBMITTED THAT O N APPEAL, THE LD. CIT (A) ALSO PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A), NOW ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4 . AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE ME THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. AO DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES HOWEVER BOTH THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNIT Y TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD . IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE PROVIDED WITH ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PURSUE HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES. LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND OBJECTED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR AND ARGUED TH AT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. AO AND BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIE S HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDERS ON MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDERS PASSED BY 3 THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE AND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSE D. 5 . WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD. CIT (A) AS WELL AS THE LD. AO HAD POSTED THE CASE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. AO ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING AND EVEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) . FURTHER , THE ASSESSEE DID NOT P LACE ANY COGENT EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO JUSTIFY HIS STAND . HENCE , THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES WER E LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO PASS ORDERS BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THIS SITUATION, WE DO NOT FIND MUCH STRENGTH IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR AND THE SUBMISSION S OF THE LD. AR , IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. AO FOR DE - NOVO CONSIDERATION THEREBY PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. AT THE SAME BREATH, WE ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY C O - OPERATE BEFORE THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES IN THEIR PROCEEDINGS FAILING WHICH THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS ON THE RECORD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 4 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH OCTOBER, 2020. SD/ - SD/ - (SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 12 TH OCTOBER, 2020. OKK COPY TO: - 1) SHRI VEERA VENKATA RAMANA BADARLA, C/O. PAWAN KUMAR CHAKRAPANI, M/S. V.M. CHAKRAPANI & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 5 - 5 - 8/9 & 10, 2 ND FLOOR, SRINIVASA BUILDING, RANIGUNJ, SECUNDERABAD 500 003. 2) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT (A) - 8, HYDERABAD. 4) THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 6, HYDERABAD. (II) ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 10, HYDERABAD. 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE