SMT. VENKATA LEELA BHAVANI NIMMAGADDA,HYDERABAD V. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 661/HYD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Venkata Leela Bhavani Nimmagadda, the appellant, who filed an appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, which had dismissed her earlier appeal for non-prosecution due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee contended that the non-compliance was due to a technical communication lapse, specifically an outdated email ID and failure to receive physical notices. The Departmental Representative opposed the remand, arguing that adequate opportunities had been provided. The Tribunal found that the non-compliance was due to a bona fide error and miscommunication, not deliberate disregard, and thus decided to remand the case for a fresh decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706946 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 15-04-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURPREET SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: PAWAN KUMAR C HAKRAPANI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ 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.661/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Smt. Venkata Leela Bhavani Nimmagadda, Hyderabad. PAN:ABYPN5066E Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 09/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 11/07/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M.: This appeal is filed by Smt. Venkata Leela Bhavani Nimmagadda (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 18.02.2025 for the A.Y. 2019-20. ITA No.661/Hyd/2025 2 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : ITA No.661/Hyd/2025 3 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer [“Ld. AO”] under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2019-20 dated 21.03.2022. However, during the course of appellate proceedings, the ITA No.661/Hyd/2025 4 assessee did not comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), and consequently, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. 4. Aggerieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that, the non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) was neither deliberate nor intentional, and occurred due to a technical communication lapse. It was pointed out that in Form no.35, the email ID provided was inadvertently mentioned as an older e-mail ID, which was not in use at the relevant time. Further, at para no.17 of Form no.35, the address for service of notice was correctly mentioned, but no notices were served at that address. As a result, the assessee remained unaware of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and could not comply. The Ld. AR contended that the assessee stands to gain nothing by avoiding compliance, and that the appeal was not dismissed on merits. Accordingly, he prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) so that the assessee may be given a reasonable opportunity to furnish submissions and supporting documents, and the matter may be decided on merits. ITA No.661/Hyd/2025 5 5. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) opposed the request of remand and submitted that, adequate opportunities had already been provided by the Ld. CIT(A), which the assessee failed to utilise. It was contended by the Ld. DR that, the failure to respond to statutory notices should not be condoned lightly, and the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) may be upheld. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and also gone through the record in the light of the submissions made by either side. It is not in dispute that the appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution due to non-compliance with notices issued during the course of the appellate proceedings. From the submission of the Ld. AR and perusal of the appeal memo in Form no.35, it is noted that, the e-mail ID provided by the assessee for communication was not in regular use and therefore, the assessee may not have received the notices issued electronically. Furthermore, at para no. 17, the postal address for service of notice was correctly given, but the assessee has submitted that no physical notice was served at that address. In these circumstances, we are inclined to accept that the non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) was due to a ITA No.661/Hyd/2025 6 bona fide error and miscommunication, rather than deliberate disregard. The assessee cannot be denied the opportunity of being heard on merits due to such a lapse, particularly when no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue if the matter is remanded. Therefore, in the interest of substantial justice and in accordance with the principles of natural justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. At the same time, the assessee is directed to co-operate fully with the appellate proceedings and to strictly comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), without seeking any unwarranted adjournments. The assessee shall also have liberty to file additional evidences or documents, if necessary, in support of its claim. 6.1 In view of the above discussion, the matter is remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to dispose of the appeal on merits after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and permitting filing of additional submissions and supporting evidence. The assessee is also directed to ensure compliance with all notices and avoid any further delay. ITA No.661/Hyd/2025 7 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 11th July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad. Dated: 11.07.2025. * Reddy gp Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. Smt. Venkata Leela Bhavani Nimmagadda, 8-3-169/19/1, Siddhartha Nagar, Vengalrao Nagar, Hyderabad-500 038 2. ACIT, Central Circle 1(4), Hyderabad. 3. Pr.CIT (Central), Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, "