Shaik Abbas, Secunderabad V. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 950/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9865 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T. SUNIL GOUTAM
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.950/Hyd/2019 A.Y. 2009-10 Shaik Abbas, Secunderabad. PAN: ADJPA 9539 J VS. JCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar Revenue by Shri T. Sunil Goutam, Sr. AR Date of hearing: 18/01/2022 Date of pronouncement: 21/01/2022 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, A.M: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad in appeal No.0198/2015-16/JCIT, Circle- 2(1)/CIT(A)-1/Hyd/2018-10, dated 13/3/2019 passed U/s. 144 r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2009-10. 2. The assessee has raised four grounds in his appeal and they are extracted herein below for reference: “1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous both in law and on the facts of the case. 2 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer passed U/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without providing proper opportunities to the appellant. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of the Assessing Officer treating the amount of Rs. 2,38,88,054/- to be income of the assessee. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the facts of the case properly and deleted the addition of Rs. 2,38,88,054/- made by the Assessing Officer only on the basis of statement recorded U/s. 131 and without bringing on record any evidence to show that the assessee actually received such income. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the burden is on the assessing officer to prove that the assessee actually received the amount of Rs. 2,38,88,054/- when the appellant confirmed that he did not receive any such amount during the previous year relevant to the impugned A.Y. 2009-10 and the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal stating that the appellant has no evidence. 6. Any other ground or grounds at the time of hearing with the leave of the Hon’ble Tribunal.” 3. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before us that the assessee could not appear before the ld. AO at the time of assessment proceedings therefore the Ld. AO passed ex-parte order U/s. 144 of the Act. It was further submitted that even before the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee could not submit sufficient evidence to justify his stand. Therefore the ld. CIT (A) confirmed the order of the Ld. A.O. and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. The ld. AR further requested that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. AO in order to provide one more opportunity to the assessee so that the assessee may be able to substantiate his claim in an effective manner as the addition is huge and unjustifiable. 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. 3 4. We have heard the rival submission and carefully perused the materials on record. After considering the submission of the both the parties and quantum of addition, we are of the view that one more opportunity is required to be provided to the assessee in order to argue his claim effectively. Accordingly, we hereby remit back the appeal of the assessee to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo consideration. The Ld. AO is also hereby directed to admit and examine any fresh evidence adduced by the assessee in order to substantiate his claim and thereafter pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merit after providing proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. At the same time, we also caution the assessee to promptly cooperate with the Ld. Revenue Authorities in their proceedings failing which they shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and merit based on the materials on record. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above. Pronounced in the open Court on 21 st January, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (DUVVURU RL REDDY) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 21 st January, 2022. OKK 4 Copy to:- 1) Appellant: Shaik Abbas C/o. T. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate, Flat No.102, Gowri Apts., H.No.3-6-195/B, Urdu Hall Lane, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 029. 2) The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. 3) The CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad. 4) The Pr. CIT-5, Hyderabad. 5) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6) Guard File