SRINIVAS AREDDY LAKKIREDDY,WARANGAL V. ITO., WARD-1, WARANGAL

ITA 851/HYD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Srinivas Areddy Lakkireddy, an agriculturist from Warangal, who appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which had dismissed his earlier appeal due to non-prosecution. The assessee faced difficulties in responding to notices and participating in proceedings due to his remote location and lack of familiarity with online processes. Initially, the Ld. AO made a significant addition to the assessee's income for A.Y. 2017-18, which was contested but not adequately addressed due to procedural non-compliance by the assessee. The ITAT, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to give the assessee another opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 28636 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M. NARMADA
• Assessee Lawyers: T. CHAITANYA KUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" आआआआ आआआआआआ आआआआआआ, आआआआआआआआ आआआ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.851/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Srinivas Areddy Lakkireddy, Warangal. PAN:AGNPL6357Q Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 12/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 06/01/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M.: This appeal is filed by Shri Srinivas Areddy Lakkireddy (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 14.08.2023 for the A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At the outset, it is seen that there is a delay of 325 days in filing of appeal before us, for which the assessee has filed a condonation petition along with affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that, the assessee is an agriculturist and resides in a village which is 100 kilometers away from the District ITA No.851/Hyd/2024 2 Headquarters. Therefore, could not frequently keep in contact with the counsel. Further, the assessee is not acquainted to the on-line proceedings. The Ld. AR further submitted that, while filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) in Form No.35, the assessee had mentioned that notice / communication may not be sent to him on e-mail. Therefore, the assessee could not came to know about the notices issued by the the Ld. CIT(A) and about the order passed by Ld. CIT(A). The assessee when received a postal communication regarding notice of demand from the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”), he contacted the Ld. AO and inform the Ld. AO that the demand may be kept in abeyance till the outcome of the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). From the Ld. AO, the assessee came to know about the dismissal of appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). As soon as the assessee came to know from the Ld. AO regarding the dismissal of the appeal, he started searching about some tax professional for filing of appeal before the ITAT. In all these process, the filing of appeal before the ITAT get delayed by 325 days. Therefore, the Ld. AR prayed before the bench to condone the delay in filing of appeal before the ITAT, which is unintentional and was beyond the control of the assessee. After considering the submission of the Ld. AR and after hearing the Ld. DR, the delay of 325 days in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee had filed it's return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 31/10/2017 admitting total income of Rs.8,76,250/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and during the scrutiny proceedings the assessee could not responded to the notices issued by Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”). Consequently the Ld. AO completed the ex-party assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 20/12/2019 by making addition of Rs.5,98,94,438/-. ITA No.851/Hyd/2024 3 4. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. AO the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee could not made compliances to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of such non-prosecution. 5. Feeling aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us. The Ld. AR submitted that both the Revenue Authorities did not provide sufficient opportunity to the assessee to submit their explanations/evidence in support of the additions made by the Ld. AO. The Ld. AR further submitted that, the assessee does not stand to gain by allowing the appeal to be disposed of without any documentary evidence being produced and it is only due to the reasons beyond the control of the assessee, the assessee could prosecute his case before both the Revenue Authorities. By consolidating all the grounds, he further submitted that, given an opportunity, the assessee is now ready to produce all such details and conduct the proceedings diligently and get the matter disposed of on merits. 6. Per contra, Ld. DR placed heavy reliance on the orders of the Revenue authorities and submitted that, sufficient opportunity has already been given by the Revenue authorities, but the assessee failed to avail the same. He opposed the grant of further opportunity to the assessee. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and also gone through the record in the light of the submissions made by either side. It could be seen from the orders of both the Revenue Authorities that in spite of many opportunities given, the assessee failed to prosecute his case on merits. It is a fact that the assessee does not stand to gain by not producing the necessary information/documents and prosecute his case on merits. Be that as it may, now the assessee is ready to produce all information/documents and get the ITA No.851/Hyd/2024 4 matter disposed of on merits. The highest that would happen by allowing an opportunity to the assessee is that a cause would be decided on merits. With this view of the matter and considering the principle of natural justice, we are of the view that fresh opportunity should be given to the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the Ld. AO for passing a fresh order on merits after affording the opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Grounds of appeal are answered accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 6th Jan., 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (LALIET KUMAR) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad. Dated: 06.01.2025. * Reddy gp Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. Shri Srinivas Areddy Lakkireddy, E-101, Aditya Empress Towers, Shaikpet Nala, Tolichowki, Golconda Post, Hyderabad-500008 2. ITO, Ward-1, Warangal. 3. Pr.CIT, Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, "