RAVI KUMAR KANDALA,HYDERABAD V. ITO., WARD-12(6), HYDERABAD

ITA 333/HYD/2025

AI Insights

Shri Ravi Kumar Kandala appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Guntur, dated 06.01.2017 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The appeal was significantly delayed, filed 2913 days late, for which the assessee sought condonation citing non-receipt of the original order and misinformation from a former tax consultant. The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay insufficient, noting a lack of reasonable diligence and absence of contemporaneous evidence to support the claim of unawareness of the appellate order for such an extended period. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the inordinate delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 632994 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V.M.MAHIDHAR
• Assessee Lawyers: YADAGIRI BHOOPATHI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न् याययक सदस् य एवं श्री मिुसूदन सावडिया, लेखा सदस् य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Shri Ravi Kumar Kandala, Hyderabad. PAN:AJPPK3365O Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(6), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri Yadagiri Bhoopathi, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri V.M. Mahidhar, SR-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 09/06/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/06/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M.: This appeal is filed by Shri Ravi Kumar Kandala (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Guntur (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 06.01.2017 for the A.Y. 2011-12. ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 2 2. At the outset, it is found that there is delay of 2913 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal, for which the assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay along with an Affidavit explaining the reasons of such delay. The Affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay is to the following effect : ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 3 ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 4 3. The assessee has filed an affidavit dated 22.05.2025 explaining the reasons for the delay. It has been submitted that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) was never received by the assessee, and that he was falsely assured by his earlier tax consultant that the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) had been decided in his favour. Based on this advice, the assessee contends that he remained under the bona fide belief that no further action was required on his part. It is further stated that he became aware of the adverse order only upon receipt of an intimation u/s 245 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 25.11.2024, where adjustment of refund was proposed against the demand for the relevant year. Upon receipt of the said intimation, the assessee, through his present consultant, approached the jurisdictional income tax office and obtained a copy of the appellate order and the assessment order. The assessee has also cited personal hardships arising from the demise of ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 5 his father on 25.06.2016, shifting of residence, and difficulty in accessing records. He has additionally submitted that there was some confusion regarding identity due to variation in the name of his deceased father across different documents such as death certificate, PAN, Aadhaar and driving licence. He has prayed that the delay may be condoned on account of these reasons, claiming that the same was neither intentional nor deliberate but due to genuine and unavoidable circumstances beyond his control. 4. The learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) has strongly objected to the condonation of such an inordinate and prolonged delay. It was submitted by the Ld. DR that the delay of nearly eight years is wholly unjustified, and the assessee has failed to produce any contemporaneous evidence to support the claim that he remained unaware of the order of Ld. CIT(A) for such an extended period. It was further argued that the affidavit merely contains broad and self-serving assertions without any corroborating documentary material to demonstrate diligence on the part of the assessee. The Ld. DR thus prayed for dismissal of the appeal as barred by limitation. ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 6 5. We have carefully gone through the affidavit filed by the assessee and the submissions advanced by both parties. On a holistic reading of the affidavit and accompanying materials, we are unable to accept that the assessee acted with reasonable diligence. The plea that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was not received for more than seven years appears improbable, especially in the absence of any evidence showing steps taken during this time to follow up the appeal status or seek a copy of the order. The explanation that the assessee was misled by his tax consultant also does not absolve him from the responsibility of monitoring the proceedings related to his own income tax matters. We further find that the assessee has not placed any material to demonstrate that he made efforts to ascertain the status of the appeal during the intervening period. The circumstances cited regarding the demise of his father and variation in documentation, though unfortunate, do not justify such an extraordinary lapse of time. In the totality of the circumstances, we find no justifiable cause to condone the delay. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is rejected. As a consequence, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as time-barred. ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 7 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10th June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad. Dated: 10.06.2025. * Reddy gp Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. Shri Ravi Kumar Kandala, Flat No.801, Pridhvi Block, My Home Nawadeepa Apartments, Madhapur, Hitec City, Hyderabad-500081 2. ITO, Ward 12(6), Hyderabad. 3. Pr.CIT, Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, "