Raju Angirekula, Nalgonda V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nalgonda

ITA 1759/Hyd/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1558 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 09-02-2021
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Section: 68; 144

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1759/HYD/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 SRI RAJU ANGIREKULA, NALGONDA. PAN: AJCPA 1841 Q VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NALGONDA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI A.V. RAGHURAM REVENUE BY: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY, DR DATE OF HEARING: 09/02/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15 /02/2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 3, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 0088/ITO, W - 1/NGL/CIT(A) - 3/16 - 17, DATED 17/08/2017 PASSED U/S. 144 R.W.S 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2013 - 14. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THREE GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL AND THEY ARE EXTRACTED HEREIN BELOW FOR REFERENCE: - 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW AND IS PERVERSE TO THE EXTENT IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE ASSESSEE. 2 2. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 59,26,705/ - MADE BY THE LD. A.O. U/S. 68 OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 3. ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. AT THE OUTSET, DURING THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LD. AR SUB MITTED BEFORE US THAT THE LD. AO HAD PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER U/S. 144 OF THE ACT WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. A.O. DUE TO PERSONAL CONSTRA INS. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT, ON APPEAL THOUGH THE LD. CIT(A) HAD OBTAINED REMAND REPORT FROM THE LD. A.O., THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO COUNTER THE REMAND REPORT HAD PASSED THE ORDER AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. I T WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. A.O., SO THAT THE ASSESSEE CAN PURSUE THE APPEAL EFFECTIVELY OTHERWISE GREAT INJUSTICE WILL BE INFLICTED ON THE ASSESSEE WHO HAS ONLY MEAGRE INCOME. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDERS OF THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND PLEADED THAT THE SAME MAY BE CONFIRMED. 4. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSING THE MATERIALS ON RECORD, WE DO NOT FIND REASONABLE MERIT IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE PROVIDED PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REBUT THE REMAND REPORT OF THE LD.AO. 3 FURTHER, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT, THE LD.AO HAD ALSO PASSED AN EX - PARTE ORDER AND CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL , IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD.AO FOR DE - NOVO CONSIDERATION. AT THE SAME BREATH, WE ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE TO PROMPTLY CO - OPER ATE 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. 5. IN T HE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREIN ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 15 TH FEBRUARY, 2021. SD/ - SD/ - (S.S. GODARA) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 15 TH FEBRUARY, 2021. OKK COPY TO: - 1) SRI RAJU ANGIREKULA C/O. K.VASANTKUMAR, A.V. RAGHU RAM, P. VINOD & M. NEELIMA DEVI, ADVOCATES, 610, BABUKHAN ESTATE, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD - 1. 2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NALGONDA. 3) THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 3. HYDERABAD. 4) THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3, HYDERABAD. 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE