SIMON PAVAN KUMAR MOSES,WARANGAL V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANG AL

ITA 557/HYD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, the appellant, who contested the additions made to his income for the assessment year 2012-13 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hyderabad. The additions were made under the heads of Long-Term Capital Gains, income from salary, and income from other sources following a re-assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not comply with notices to furnish details and failed to appear during the appellate proceedings, leading to the dismissal of his appeal by the CIT(A) and subsequently by the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 790017 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Fair market value; Salary income; Capital Gains
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 50C

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ SMC ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री विजय पाल राि, माननीय उपाध्यक्ष एिं श्री मंजूनाथ जी, माननीय लेखा सदस्य SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.557/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-13) Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, R/o. Hanumakonda. PAN : AIOPM2276L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Hyderabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented by : None. राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented by : Ms. B. Malathi, Sr.A.R. सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 24.11.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ Date of Pronouncement : 28.11.2025 O R D E R PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Panchkula dated 20.12.2024, pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.557/Hyd/2025 Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, Warangal 2. At the outset, there is a delay of 28 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay, stating that, he was not aware of the operational process of the Income Tax Departmental portal and, therefore, could not download the order as soon as it was uploaded. He could download the order only with the help of the assistant working in the Chartered Accountant’s office at Warangal in the first week of March 2025. Thereafter, he approached the present Authorized Representative, Shri Samuel Nagadesi, Chartered Accountant, Hyderabad, who advised him to file the appeal. The assessee submitted that, the delay is neither wilful nor with any intention to gain undue benefit. He, therefore, prayed that the delay of 28 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal may be condoned and the appeal be admitted for adjudication. 3. Ms. Malathi B. learned Sr. A.R. for the Revenue, on the other hand, did not strongly object for condonation of delay of 28 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.557/Hyd/2025 Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, Warangal 4. We have heard the learned Sr. A.R. for the Revenue and perused the affidavit filed by the assessee seeking for condonation of 28 days delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. We find that, there is a ‘reasonable and sufficient cause’ for the assessee in not filing the appeal before the Tribunal within the prescribed date. We, therefore, condone the delay of 28 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and has filed his return of income for A.Y. 2012-13. The assessment has been subsequently re-opened under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) for the reasons recorded, as per which the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment towards under-assessment of capital gains derived from transfer of property and accordingly, notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 29.03.2019 was issued and served on the assessee. In response to the notice, the assessee did not furnish return of income. Thereafter, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act, was issued and called upon the assessee to furnish relevant details, however, there was no compliance from the assessee. Therefore, the A.O. passed best judgment assessment order under Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.557/Hyd/2025 Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, Warangal Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 13.12.2019 and determined the total income at Rs. 3,88,170/- by making addition of Rs. 1,80,991/- towards Long-Term Capital Gain on account of transfer of property and also addition of Rs. 2,06,695/- under the head income from salary towards deductions claimed under Chapter VI-A for want of evidences. The A.O. had also made addition of Rs. 483/- towards interest income. 6. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, hearing notices were issued on 22.07.2020, 31.12.2020, 10.04.2024, and 10.12.2024. In response, the assessee has not furnished any submissions in support of grounds of appeal. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in ‘limine’ for want of prosecution and sustained the additions made by the A.O. towards capital gains, income from salary and income from other sources. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.557/Hyd/2025 Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, Warangal 8. None appeared for the assessee. 9. We have heard the learned Sr. A.R. for the Revenue, perused the material available on record and had gone through the orders of the authorities below. The A.O. made addition of Rs. 1,80,991/- towards 1/60th share of capital gains derived by the assessee from transfer of property on the basis of details available with the Department, where the A.O. noticed that, the assessee has sold the property for a consideration of Rs. 83,60,000/- whereas the Fair Market Value as per SRO was Rs. 1,42,35,000/-. The A.O., after taking note of relevant facts, has assessed the difference between sale consideration and the Fair Market Value as per Section 50C of the Act, and made addition of Rs. 1,80,991/- being the 1/60th share of the assessee. The assessee could not appear and explain his case with relevant evidences. Since the assessee could not explain his case, in our considered view, there is no error in the reasons given by the A.O. to assess the income at Rs. 1,80,991/- under the head capital gains. Thus, we uphold the additions made by the A.O. towards income from long-term capital gains. Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No.557/Hyd/2025 Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, Warangal 10. Similarly, the A.O. made addition of Rs. 2,06,695/- towards deductions claimed under Chapter VI-A on the ground that the assessee could not furnish documentary evidences in support of the deductions. None appeared for the assessee and no relevant evidences were furnished in support of the claim. Since the assessee could not furnish any evidences to justify the deductions claimed under Chapter VI-A, in our considered view, there is no error in the reasons given by the A.O. to make the addition of Rs. 2,06,695/- under the head ‘income from salary’. Similarly, the A.O. also made addition of Rs. 483/- towards interest income on the basis of material available on record. We find that the assessee has earned interest of Rs. 483/- from his savings bank account and the same has not been offered to tax. The A.O., after considering the relevant facts, has assessed the interest income under the head ‘income from other sources’. Therefore, we uphold the additions made by the A.O. Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA No.557/Hyd/2025 Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, Warangal 11. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 28th November, 2025. Sd/- श्री विजय पाल राि (VIJAY PAL RAO) उपाध्यक्ष /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (मंजूिधथ जी) (MANJUNATHA G.) लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 28.11.2025. TYNM/sps आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Simon Pavan Kumar Moses, 6-1-52, Opp. St. Pauls School, Jaya Prakash Nagar, Hanamkonda. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Warangal. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. 4. नवभधगीयप्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, हैदरधबधद / DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 5. गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Hyderabad Printed from counselvise.com "