MUJTABA HUSSAIN AHMED, NIZAMABAD V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 399/Hyd/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6093 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SWAPNIL PATIL
• Section: 143(3); 69A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “SMC”, HYDERABAD (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.399/Hyd/2021 A.Y. 2019-20 Mujtaba Hussain Ahmed, Nizamabad. PAN: DFNPA 7735 D VS. ACIT, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri Swapnil Patil, Sr. AR Date of hearing: 02/12/2021 Date of pronouncement: 20/12/2021 ORDER This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-11, Hyderabad in appeal No.10390/2018-19, dated 7/9/2021 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised five grounds in his appeal, and they are extracted herein below for reference: (1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous in law and in facts of the case. (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner ought to have held that the seizure of cash itself is illegal and ought to have held that the assessment be annulled. (3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner ought to have deleted the addition of Rs. 25,81,570/- and ought not to have upheld the same as the same is fully explained. (4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner erred in law and facts of the case in upholding the addition U/s. 69A and charging tax U/s. 115BBE. 2 (5) The Appellant craves leave to add to, alter, delete, substitute, modify, amend all or any of the grounds mentioned above.” 3. At the outset, on the date of hearing, none appeared before the Bench to represent the assessee’s case. On examining the order of the Ld. CIT(A), it is apparent that the Ld. CIT(A) had passed ex-parte order based on the written submissions filed by the assessee and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Further, the sole issue involved in this appeal relates to the addition of Rs. 25,81,250/- U/s. 69A of the Act made by the Ld. A.O and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the issue involved in the appeal, I am of the view that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld CIT (A) in order to provide one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Ld. DR, on the other hand argued stating that though proper opportunity had been provided to the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), on the given dates of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee except filing the written submissions. It was further submitted that the Ld. CIT (A) had no other option but to pass order based on the written submissions filed by the assessee and the materials available on record. Hence, it was pleaded, that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) does not call for any interference. 4. On perusing the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and the material available on record, it appears that the assessee had not been provided with proper opportunity to represent his case in an effective manner. 3 Therefore, considering facts and circumstances of the case as well as the issues involved in the appeal, in the interest of justice, I hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) in order to consider the appeal afresh on merits by providing one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate before the Ld. CIT(A) in the proceedings failing which the Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merit based on the material on the record. It is ordered accordingly. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above. Pronounced in the open Court on the 20 th December, 2021. Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 20 th December, 2021. OKK Copy to:- 1) Mujtaba Hussain Ahmed, H.No.9-8-125, Malapally, Nizamabad – 503001. 2) The ACIT, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad. 3) The CIT (A)-11, Hyderabad. 4) The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Hyderabad. 5) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6) Guard File