PRAVEEN KUMAR AITHA,KARIMNAGAR V. ITO, WARD-2, KARIMNAGAR

ITA 418/HYD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Praveen Kumar Aitha, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which dismissed his appeal for non-compliance. The original assessment was completed under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where the assessee's bank deposits were treated as income, leading to an addition of Rs.59,41,500. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not addressed the merits of the case in his decision and thus remanded the case back for a thorough examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633602 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SACHIN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S.RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न् याययक सदस् य एिं श्री मिुसूदन सािडिया, लेखा सदस् य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.418/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Shri Praveen Kumar Aitha, Karimnagar. PAN:BEYPA1354Q Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Karimnagar. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वधिध/Assessee by: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate िधजस्‍ व द्वधिध/Revenue by: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR सुिवधई की तधिीख/Date of hearing: 10/06/2025 घोषणध की तधिीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M. : This appeal is filed by Shri Praveen Kumar Aitha (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 20.01.2025 for the A.Y. 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : ITA No.418/Hyd/2025 2 “ 1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing further opportunity. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have provided further opportunity when the appellant sought for time for hearing on 08.01.2025. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the grounds on merit. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have seen that the proceedings initiated u/s.147 and issue of notices u/s.148A are all not valid. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have observed that the officers who issued the notices and decided the assessment has no jurisdiction. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the fact that the gross amount received cannot be treated a sthe income of the appellant and ought not to have confirmed the addition made of Rs.59,41,500/- treating the aggregate of the deposits made into the bank account as the income of the appellant. 8. Any other ground / grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment in this case was completed by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 02/03/2024. Aggrieved by the said reassessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the assessee failed to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, primarily on the ground of non-compliance and absence of prosecution by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that although ITA No.418/Hyd/2025 3 the assessee was unable to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the matter on merits. It was submitted that the appellate order is non-speaking and passed in violation of principles of natural justice. The Ld. AR further pleaded that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee, and the matter may be remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for proper adjudication on merits after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee. 5. Per contra, the learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) supported the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that sufficient opportunity was granted to the assessee which was not availed. Therefore, the Ld. DR argued that no further indulgence is warranted. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and also gone through the records in the light of submissions made on either side. It is not in dispute that the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). At the same time, we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without dealing with the merits of the case while upholding the action of the Ld. AO. On perusal of the impugned appellate order, we find that the order is non- speaking, as it does not contain any discussion on merits of the case, nor any findings on the grounds raised by the assessee. It is a well-settled law that the first appellate authority is required to pass a reasoned and speaking order. ITA No.418/Hyd/2025 4 Dismissing the appeal merely for non-compliance, without addressing the grounds on merit, amounts to denial of justice. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh on merits, after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee. 7. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation before the Ld. CIT(A) and not seek unnecessary adjournments. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12th June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad. Dated: 12.06.2025. * Reddy gp ITA No.418/Hyd/2025 5 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. Shri Praveen Aitha, Garepally Kataram, Karimnagar-505 503 2. ITO, Ward-2, Karimnagar. 3. Pr.CIT, Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, "