NALLA DEVENDER REDDY,HYDERABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1190/HYD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Nalla Devender Reddy, a senior citizen and pensioner, who faced an assessment under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to a cash deposit of Rs.23,12,926 during the demonetization period, which was treated as unexplained money under section 69A. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to a delay attributed to health issues and miscommunication of notices. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to present his case and thus set aside the CIT(A)'s order, remanding the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 46443 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SACHIN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SREEKAR REDDY
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Period of limitation; Principle of natural justice; Rectification of order; Time period of passing order
• Section: 147; 144; 154; 69A

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARYT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.1190/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Nalla Devender Reddy Hyderabad [PAN : AVTPR3593D] Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-11(1) Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍ यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती‍द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri Sreekar Reddy, AR रधजस्‍ व‍द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr.Sachin Kumar, DR सुिवधई‍की‍तधरीख/Date of hearing: 18/02/2025 घोर्णध की‍तधरीख/Pronouncement on: 12/03/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the orders dated 18/9/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (“learned CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in the case of Nalla Devender Reddy (“the assessee”), assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual senior citizen, drawing pension income and agricultural income. Assessment in the case of the assessee was completed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) and the learned Assessing Officer passed assessment order dated 09/09/2021, by making addition of cash 2 deposit of Rs.23,12,926/- made during the demonetization period as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. Later the learned Assessing Officer found some defects in the assessment order passed and accordingly passed Rectification order under section 154 read with section 147 dated 15/06/2023. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) with the delay of 45 days. Learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee ex-parte, holding that the assessee has given medical reason, but has not filed any documentary evidence, such as medical certificate / records to substantiate his claim. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. At the outset, the learned AR submitted that the assessee is a senior citizen aged about 70 years and mail updated in the income tax portal was not his mail address and the assessee has no means of accessing the notices issued. Assessee has not even received the physical notices issued by the learned Assessing Officer due to severe covid pandemic. Learned AR further submitted that the assessee was also hospitalized during the period and after his recovery, he came to know about the fact that the assessment order was issued to the mail id of his grand daughter and the assessee took immediate steps to file appeal before the learned CIT(A), which caused delay. 5. Learned AR further submitted that the delay in filing appeal before the learned CIT(A) was neither deliberate nor intentional and the learned CIT(A) is not justified in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He, therefore, prayed for an opportunity before the Revenue authorities to substantiate his claim with credible evidences in the interest of justice. 6. Learned DR on the other hand relied on the orders of the Revenue authorities and submitted that despite giving multiple opportunities, the assessee could not comply with the notices. He, therefore, submitted that 3 the learned CIT(A) is justified in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee and no further opportunity is required to be given. 7. We have gone through the record in the light of the submission made either side. It is evident that notices were issued for appearance of the assessee on various dates to the email address, but the assessee does not seem to have participated in the enquiries on those dates due to the fact that the email address was not his and even the assessee could not receive physical notices issued due to severe COVID pandemic. However, plea of the assessee is that he was hospitalized during the period and came to know about the service of assessment order from his grand daughter after expiry of limitation period to file appeal before the learned CIT(A) and hence an opportunity of hearing may be given to substantiate his claim, in view of principles of natural justice. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the relaxation given by Hon’ble Supreme Court due to COVID, we hold that the assessee does not stand to gain by allowing the appeal to be disposed of ex-parte and the highest that would happen is that the cause could be decided on merits if an opportunity of hearing is provided to the assessee. 8. With this view of the matter, we take a view that allowing an opportunity to the assessee to submit his papers and to conduct the case diligently would serve the ends of justice. We set aside the impugned order and restore to the file of the learned Assessing Officer to receive the documents and to consider the contentions of the assessee after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to take a view according to law. Grounds of appeal are answered accordingly. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose . Order pronounced in the open court on this the 12th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 12/03/2025 L.Rama, SPS 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Shri Nalla Devender Reddy, 401, Sri Sai Apartment, Manovikas Nagar Hasmetpet, Manovikasnagar S.O., Tirumalagiri, Hyderabad 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Hyderabad 3. The Pr.CIT, Hyderabad 4. The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 5. GUARD File TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, HYDERABAD "