RAVINDER REDDY SINGIDI,VIKARABAD V. ITO., WARD-1, VIKARABAD

ITA 1162/HYD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ravinder Reddy Singidi, who appealed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which were based on the assessments made by the Income Tax Officer under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17. The primary contention was that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution without considering the substantive issues raised, which involved large deposits in the assessee's bank account purportedly used for agricultural purposes by multiple farmers. The Tribunal noted the procedural lapses and directed a fresh examination of the case on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 786085 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another, Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT, Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd., CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice; Co-operative Credit Society
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Įी रवीश सूद, माननीय ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी मधुसूदन सावͫडया, माननीय लेखा सदèय SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 (Ǔनधा[रणवष[/ Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17) Ravinder Reddy Singidi, Vikarabad. PAN: BDNPS7505R VS. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikarabad. (अपीलाथȸ/ Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/ Respondent) करदाताकाĤǓतǓनͬध×व/ Assessee Represented by : Sri MV Joshi, Chartered Accountant (for Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CA) राजèवकाĤǓतǓनͬध×व/ Department Represented by : Ms. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR सुनवाईसमाÜतहोनेकȧǓतͬथ/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 27/10/2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/ Date of Pronouncement : 31/10/2025 ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: The captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the respective orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 23/10/2024, which in turn arises from the respective orders passed by the assessing officer (AO) under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) for the assessment years 2014-15, 2015- 16 and 2016-17. As a common issue is involved in the present appeals, therefore, the same are being taken up and disposed of vide a consolidated order. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-15 in ITA No.1161/Hyd/2025. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: 1.The order of the CIT(A) passed u/s 250 of the Act dated 23-10-2024 is erroneous both on facts and in law to the extent the order is prejudice to the interests of the appellant. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the fact that the appellant's account was merely a conduit for farmers to deposit and withdraw funds for agricultural purposes. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts that the credit society account was in the name of the appellant does not automatically establishes the assessee's ownership on the deposits made by multiple third-party farmers and that the Ld. AO failed to verify it and therefore dismissing the appeal, was unjustified. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the deposits made into appellant's account were made by several farmers who used the account to promote agricultural activities which were unrelated to appellant's income. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the appellant does not have control over or benefit from the deposits made by farmers which were used for the purpose of agricultural activities. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the Ld. AO failed to properly verify the nature of the deposits before making the additions to the appellant's income. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Ld. AO wrongly invoked section 69A of the Act to treat the deposits in the appellant's income as \"Unexplained Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO Investment\" even though these were the deposits made by the third parties i.e. farmers. 8. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the appellant has been consistently and regularly filing its returns and discharged its tax liabilities accordingly, with no mala fide intention to evade income tax. 9. Appellant may, add or alter or amend or modify or substitute or delete and/or rescind all or any of the grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his original return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 25/9/2014, declaring an income of Rs.4,91,470/-. Thereafter, the AO was in receipt of information from the Investigation Wing that the assessee had during the subject year made deposits of Rs.12,02,94,771/- in his bank account held with M/s. Sri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Limited. The AO based on the aforesaid information, and taking cognizance of the fact that the income returned by the assessee was not commensurate with the deposits made during the subject year in his bank account, reopened the assessee’s case under section 147 of the Act. Notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30/03/2021 was issued to the assessee. As the assessee neither filed his return of income in compliance to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act nor furnished the requisite details as were called for vide notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act, therefore, the AO vide his order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 28/03/2022 held the Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO entire amount of Rs.12,02,94,771/- (supra) as the assessee’s unexplained investment under section 69A of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before CIT(A). 4. We find that as the assessee despite having been put to notice about the fixation of the appeal on seven occasions i.e., vide notices dated 21/03/2023, 04/08/2023, 20/02/2024, 29/03/2024, 19/06/2024, 04/07/2024, 09/07/2024 and 01/10/2024 had failed to comply to the same, therefore, the CIT(A) held a conviction that he was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. 5. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 6. We have heard the Learned Authorized Representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. 7. Sri M V Joshi, Chartered Accountant, the Learned Authorized Representative (for short “Ld. AR”) for the assessee, at the threshold of hearing of the appeal, submitted that the CIT(A) had grossly erred in law Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO and facts of the case in dismissing the appeal by a non-speaking order on the standalone reason of want of prosecution 8. Per contra, Ms. U Mini Chandran, Commissioner of Income Tax- Departmental Representative (for short “Ld. DR”) relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. However, the Ld. CIT-DR on being confronted by the fact that there was no whisper in the CIT(A) order qua the merits of the case and the appeal was dismissed on the simpliciter basis of non-prosecution, failed to rebut the same. 9. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the contentions advanced by the Learned Authorized Representatives of both parties in the backdrop of the orders of the authorities below. 10. Before proceeding further, we deem it apposite to cull out the observations of the CIT(A), as under: “4.1 I have perused the assessment order and other relevant records. The assessment order was passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against which the appellant preferred an appeal before the undersigned. 4.2 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant was granted many opportunities for presenting his case and filing detailed submission in support of various grounds of appeal taken by him. However, on none of the occasions, the appellant chose to file a submission or filed any documents, evidences or even requested for adjournment. It may be noted that in the faceless appeal environment, all the notices are issued to the appellant at the email address provided by him, and also, all the submission are supposed to be filed online through the appeal module available to the appellant online in his e-filing portal. In this electronic communication environment, the emails/notices/letters are routed through the NFAC, and the appellant is expected to respond through the same environment. Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO 4.3 Having noted thus, it is a fact that the appellant chose not to submit anything in response to various notices issued to him thereby giving him ample opportunity of hearing, which is also in accordance to principle of natural justice. The table below list the various dates of issuing of notices, dates of hearing/submission granted to the appellant and the response of the appellant: 4.4. It is very clear form the above table that the appellant has chosen not to submit anything in support of his various grounds of appeal. In such a scenario, I am of the considered opinion that the appellant does not have anything to say or have anything to offer to the appellate authority in support of his various grounds of appeal. It further means that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. For this view I find support from the following decisions: - (a) The Hon'ble SC in the case of CIT vs B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] their Lordships have held that: \"The appeal does not r not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively perusing it.” (b) In the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) the Hon'ble High court while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order: \"If the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference.\" (c) In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO fixed for hearing, but on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as un admitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. (d) Further, the law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights; i.e., “vigilantibus non dormientibus, jura subveniunt”. 4.5. I, therefore, dismiss all the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee. 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.” 11. Admittedly, there is no denying of the fact that the assessee despite having been put to notice about the fixation of the hearing of the appeal on seven occasions had neither participated nor filed any written submissions with the CIT(A). Although, we are principally in agreement with the CIT(A) that in case of the failure on the part of an assessee/appellant to participate in the appellate proceedings, the said proceedings cannot be stalled, but at the same time are unable to persuade ourselves to concur with the manner in which the said appeal had been disposed of vide a non-speaking order and dismissed for the standalone reason of want of prosecution on the part of the assessee appellant. 12. We find that CIT(A) while disposing of the appeal had failed to advert to the specific grounds of appeal based on which the impugned order was assailed by the assessee before him and has simply dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Printed from counselvise.com 8 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO 13. We are unable to concur with the manner in which the appeal had been disposed of by the CIT(A) vide a non-speaking order. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom). The Hon’ble High Court in the aforementioned case had observed as under: \"8. From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the AO to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Sec. 250 of the Act. Further, Sec. 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Sec. 251(1)(a) and (h) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-s. (2) of s. 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under s. 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact w.e.f. 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the AO and restore it to the AO for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CITIA) are co-terminus with that of the AO i.e. he can do all that A.O could do. Therefore, just as it is not open to the AO to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non- prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the s. 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Sec. 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.\" 14. We, thus, in terms of our observations are unable to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the dismissal of the assessee’s appeal vide a non-speaking order by the CIT(A). We are of a firm conviction that the matter requires to be revisited by the CIT(A), who is directed to re- adjudicate and dispose of the appeal vide a speaking and a reasoned Printed from counselvise.com 9 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO order. Needless to say, the CIT(A) in the course of the set aside proceedings shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 15. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations. ITA Nos. 1162 & 1163/Hyd/2025 (AY:2015-16 and 2016-17) 16. As the facts and issue involved in the present appeals remain the same as was there before us in ITA No. 1161/Hyd/2025, therefore, our order therein passed shall apply mutatis mutandis for the purpose of disposing of the captioned appeals. 17. In the result, all the three appeals, i.e., ITA No. 1161/Hyd/2025, ITA No. 1162/Hyd/2025 and ITA No. 1163/Hyd/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations. Order pronounced in the open court on 31ST October, 2025. S Sd/- Sd/- (मधुसूदन सावͫडया) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) लेखासदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- Sd/- (रवीश सूद) (RAVISH SOOD) ÛयाǓयकसदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER d/- Printed from counselvise.com 10 ITA Nos. 1161, 1162 and 1163/Hyd/2025 Ravinder Reddy Singidi vs. ITO Sd Hyderabad, dated 31.10.2025. *OKK/sps आदेशकȧĤǓतͧलͪपअĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. Ǔनधा[ǐरती/The Assessee : Ravinder Reddy Singidi, C/o. P. murali & Co, Chartered Accountants, 6-3-655/2/3, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, Telangana-500082. 2. राजèव/ The Revenue : Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vikarabad, Telangana. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. 4. ͪवभागीयĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकरअपीलȣयअͬधकरण /DR,ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax 6. गाड[फ़ाईल / Guard file आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Hyderabad. Printed from counselvise.com "