RAMESH SANGHUBOTLA,MAHABOOBNAGAR V. ITO., WARD-1, MAHABUBNAGAR

ITA 970/HYD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Ramesh Sanghubotla, the appellant, against the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Mahbubnagar, the respondent. The appeal was directed against the order of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18, which was dismissed due to non-prosecution. The appellant's counsel argued that the dismissal was unjust as the last notice from the CIT (A) was not received by the assessee, preventing any submission or response. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument and decided to remand the case for a fresh hearing, emphasizing the need for an appropriate opportunity of hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793467 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K PRABHABATI
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

" Page 1 of 4 आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ SM-B- ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.970/Hyd/2025 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Ramesh Sanghubotla Mahbubnagar PAN:CQKPS7850J Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Mahbubnagar (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधाŊįरती Ȫारा/Assessee by: Advocate K Prabhabati राज̾ व Ȫारा/Revenue by:: Shri Shankar Pandi P, Sr.AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 11/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/09/2025 आदेश/ORDER Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24/03/2025 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, for the A.Y.2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Printed from counselvise.com Page 2 of 4 3. The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution and has not decided the same on merits. He has referred to the details of notice issued by the learned CIT (A) as given in para 4.1 of the impugned order and submitted that after issuing the earlier notice of 12/04/2021 and 13/3/2022 both during the Covid-19 pandemic period, the last notice was issued by the learned CIT (A) on 13/03/2025 and then passed the Printed from counselvise.com Page 3 of 4 impugned order on 24/03/2025. He has pointed out that the last notice issued by the learned CIT (A) on 13/03/2025 was not received by the assessee and therefore, the assessee could not file any submission, reply, details/documents before the learned CIT (A). He has then submitted that the assessee was not given an appropriate opportunity of hearing before passing the impugned order. Thus, he has prayed that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the record of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 4. On the other hand, the learned DR has not seriously objected to the prayer of the assessee, if the matter is remanded to the record of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the impugned order of the learned CIT (A). The learned CIT (A) has given the details of the notices issued in para 4.1 as under: 6. Thus, it is clear that the first two notices were issued on 12/04/2021, 13/03/2022 during the Covid-19 Pandemic period. The last notice was issued on 13/03/2025 and thereafter, the impugned order was passed on 24/03/2025. It is clear from Printed from counselvise.com Page 4 of 4 the details that there is a gap of 3 years in the earlier notice issued by the learned CIT (A) and the last notice issued on 13/03/2025. Thereafter, the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution without deciding the same on merits. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we grant one more opportunity to the assessee to present its case before the learned CIT (A). Hence, the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication of the appeal of the assessee on merits after giving an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 26th September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (VIJAY PAL RAO) VICE-PRESIDENT Hyderabad, dated 26th September, 2025. Vinodan/sps Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Shri Ramesh Sanghubotla, 8-1-42 Chinna Agraharam Gadwal, Mahbubnagar 509125 2 Income Tax Officer Ward-1 DEO Office Road, Mahbubnagar 509001 3 Pr. CIT - Hyderabad 4 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 5 Guard File By Order Printed from counselvise.com "