Hymavathi Reddy Dantapally, Hyderabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

ITA 759/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5267 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY
• Assessee Lawyers: N.M.PURANAM
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 759/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 HYMAVATHI REDDY DANTAPALLY, HYDERABAD [PAN: ABVPD5733B] VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI N.M.PURANAM, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 21-01-2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08-02-2021 O R D E R PER BENCH : THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR AY.2015-16 ARISES FROM TH E CIT(A)-4, HYDERABADS ORDER DATED 25-02-2019 PASSED IN APPEAL NO. 10270 / 17-18 / DCIT, CIR-16(2), HYD/CIT (A)-4/ HYD /18-19 INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S.143(3) OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [IN SHORT, THE ACT]. 2. IT APPEARS AT THE OUTSET THAT THE CIT(A)S ORDER CONFIR MING THE ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION DENYING SECTION 10(1) EXEMPTION QUA THE ASSESSEES AGRICULTURAL INCOME; HAS BEEN PASSED EX-PARTE. WE NOTICE FROM A PERUSAL OF PARA 4 IN THE CIT(A)S ORDER THAT ALTHOUGH HE IS STATED TO HAVE POSTED THE ASSES SEES LOWER APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 14-12-2018, 22-01-2019, 12-02- ITA NO. 759/HYD/2019 :- 2 -: 2019 AND 22-02-2019, THERE IS NO INDICATION AS TO WHET HER SHE HAD BEEN ACTUALLY SERVED THE CORRESPONDING NOTICE(S) OR NOT. FACED WITH THIS SITUATION, WE ARE TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT THIS TAXPAYER HAS BEEN PROSECUTING THE REMEDY TILL THE I NSTANT SECOND APPEAL PROCEEDINGS AND IT COULD BE SUFFICIENTL Y ASSUMED THAT HER NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS NEITHER INTENTIONAL NOR DELIBERATE BUT ON ACCOUNT OF SOME COMMUNICATION GAP. WE THEREFORE RESTORE THE ASSESSEES FOREGOING SOLE GRIEVANCE BACK TO THE CIT(A) FOR HIS A PPROPRIATE ADJUDICATION AS PER LAW, WITHIN THREE EFFECTIVE OPPO RTUNITIES OF HEARING. 3. IT IS A LASTLY CLARIFIED ON THE ASSESSEES BEHEST THAT SHE HAS ALSO PLACED ON RECORD SOME ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE O F HAVING DERIVED THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVI TIES ONLY. WE TAKE NOTE OF THE SAME AND DIRECT THE CIT(A) TO CONSIDER ALL THE MATERIAL COMING FROM THE ASSESSEES S IDE AS PER LAW WITHIN THREE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITIES OF HEARIN G. THE ASSESSEE HERSELF OR THROUGH HER AUTHORISED REPRESENTA TIVE SHALL APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON OR BEFORE 30-06-2021 FOR FURTHER CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS. 4. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH FEBRUARY, 2021 SD/- SD/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.GO DARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER HYDERABAD, DATED: 08-02-2021 TNMM ITA NO. 759/HYD/2019 :- 3 -: COPY TO : 1.HYMAVATHI REDDY DANTAPALLY, C/O.BALAJI ASSOCIATES , FLAT NO.103, KRISHE VALLEY APARTMENTS, ROAD NO.12, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD. 2.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16( 2), HYDERABAD. 3.CIT(APPEALS)-4, HYDERABAD. 4.PR.CIT-4, HYDERABAD. 5.D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6.GUARD FILE.