Srinivas Koppolu , Hyderabad V. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

ITA 265/Hyd/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7307 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD B EFORE SH RI LA XMI PRA SA D SAHU , AC COUNTA NT MEM BER AND SHR I K . N AR ASIM H A C HA RY, JUDI CI AL MEMBER ITA No. 265/HYD/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Srinivas Koppolu, Hyderabad. PAN – AFAPK 3479G Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 2(2), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri ASRSS Siva Prasad Revenue by: Shri Rohit Mujumdar Date of hearing: 08/03/2022 Date of pronouncement: 09/03/2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against CIT(A) – 2, Hyderabad’s order, dated 21/01/2020 for AY 2013-14 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ; in short “the Act”. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, filed his return of income for the AY 2013-14 on 31/03/2015 admitting total income of Rs. 3,51,65,100/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under ITA No. 265/Hyd/2020 Srinivas Koppolu, Hyderabad. :- 2 -: CASS and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 22/03/2016 by disallowing assessee’s claim of tax relief u/s 90/90A amounting to Rs. 30,20,240/-. 3. When the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-prosecution. 4. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 5. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee filed a paper book which is placed on record and drew the Bench attention to computation of income to submit that the assessee is eligible for tax credit as per section 90/91A of the tax credit as paid by him in USA. 6. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities and submitted that the CIT(A) has given numerous opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its claim of tax relief, but, the assessee failed to provide necessary documents during the course of assessment proceedings as well as during the course of appellate proceedings. 7. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material on record as well as gone ITA No. 265/Hyd/2020 Srinivas Koppolu, Hyderabad. :- 3 -: through the orders of revenue authorities. Since the assessee failed to furnish in support of payment of the taxes to US income tax authorities, the AO disallowed the assessee’s claim u/s 90/91A of the Act. As the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the income has been offered for tax and tax paid thereon, we remit the issue to the file of the AO with a direction to examine the documentary evidence which will be furnished before him by the assessee in support of his claim and decide the issue in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We direct the assessee to appear before the AO with all the relevant evidences to substantiate his claim; at its own risk and responsibility to be followed by three effective opportunities of hearing. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. Pronounced in the open court on 9 th March, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) (L. P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 9 th March, 2022. kv ITA No. 265/Hyd/2020 Srinivas Koppolu, Hyderabad. :- 4 -: Copy to : 1 Srinivas Koppolu, B-100, Gama Block, Jayabheri Silicon Country, Kondapur, Hyderabad. 2 ACIT, Circle – 2(2), Hyderabad. 3 CIT(A) - 2, Hyderabad. 4 PR. CIT – 2, Hyderabad. 5 ITAT, DR, Hyderabad. 6 Guard File.