SUDHA MURTHY BOYINA,HYDERABAD V. ITO., WARD-12(6), HYDERABAD

ITA 1256/HYD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sudha Murthy Boyina, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) concerning the assessment year 2018-19. The primary issue arose from the reopening of the assessee's case under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to non-filing of income tax return despite receiving sale consideration from immovable property. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148, to which the assessee responded by filing a return declaring 'Nil' income and claiming deductions. Discrepancies in reported long-term capital loss and unexplained bank credits led to additional assessments. The CIT(A) upheld these additions, leading to the current appeal. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in the CIT(A)'s handling of the appeal and the Assessing Officer's assessment, necessitating a de novo assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472558 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SM-B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SRIKANTH REDDY Y
• Keywords: Set aside; Corroborative evidences; Gift; Capital Gains; Source of fund
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad SM ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant Member and Shri K.Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1256/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sudha Murthy Boyina Hyderabad [PAN :ACEPB4211A] Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-12(6) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: None रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Srikanth Reddy Y, DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of Hearing: 22/01/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement: 29/01/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER. MANJUNATHA G., A.M: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.08.2024 of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.CIT(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, pertaining to A.Y.2018-19. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for the reason that the assessee has received sale consideration on sale of immovable property, however, not filed her return of income for the A.Y.2018-19 and therefore, notice 2 ITA No.1256/Hyd/2024 Sudha Murthy Boyina u/s 148 of the Act was issued and served on the assessee. In response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee has filed her return of income on 19.06.2023, declaring ‘Nil’ total income, after claiming deduction of Rs.198/- under Chapter VIA and current year loss of Rs.35,96,384/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to file necessary evidences, including details of sale of property, computation of long term capital gains and also bank statements for the relevant assessment year. In response, the assessee has filed all details including capital gain statement and also explained the source for cash credits in the bank account out of gift received from V.Aravind Kumar, son-in-law, maturity amount received from Prudential ICICI Insurance, gift from B.Ritika, daughter and other transactions. The Assessing Officer, after considering the relevant details filed by the assessee, recomputed the long term capital gain from sale of property by reducing the cost of construction and worked out long term capital loss of Rs.20,39,239/- as against long term capital loss computed by the assessee at Rs.35,96,384/-. The Assessing Officer further made addition of Rs.17,47,736/- towards credit in the bank account as income from other sources and after allowing deduction for investment under Chapter VIA of Rs.1,39,420/-, determined the total income at Rs.16,08,514/-. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee 3 ITA No.1256/Hyd/2024 Sudha Murthy Boyina neither appeared nor filed any details. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) disposed of the appeal filed by the assessee on the basis of material available on record and upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards credits in the bank account and re-computation of short term capital loss. 4. Aggrieved by the Ld.CIT(A) order, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. None appeared for the assessee, although the notice of hearing was sent to the address given in Form 36 filed by the assessee. The postal authorities returned the notice of hearing unserved with the remark ‘unclaimed’. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee is heard and disposed of ex-parte, on the basis of material available on record. The Assessing Officer made additions towards total credits in the bank account on the ground that the assessee could not explain the credits with relevant evidences. We find that the assessee has filed details in response to notice issued by the Assessing Officer and explained the credits in the bank account from various sources of income including gift received from V.Aravind Kumar, son-in-law, gift from B.Ritika, daughter, loan from Vivek Paloor, friend, maturity amount received from prudential ICICI Insurance, interest credit by bank etc. This fact has been recorded by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order on page 5 and 6. Although the assessee has filed submission with regard to nature and source of credit in the bank account, but the Assessing Officer made addition under the head ‘income from 4 ITA No.1256/Hyd/2024 Sudha Murthy Boyina other sources’ on the ground that no supporting evidences have been filed by the assessee. Before the Ld.CIT(A), admittedly, the assessee neither appeared nor filed any details. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in cryptic two line order, without considering the explanation furnished by the assessee before the Assessing Officer. Since the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) is ex-parte and further the Assessing Officer had taken a contrary view and made addition towards credits in bank account, even though he admitted that the assessee has filed submission on the issue, in our considered view, the issue needs to go back to the file of the Assessing Officer for reconsideration. Thus, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer and also direct the Assessing Officer to reconsider the issue denovo in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 29th January, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (K.NARASIMHA CHARY) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MANJUNATHA G.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated 29th January, 2025 L.Rama, SPS 5 ITA No.1256/Hyd/2024 Sudha Murthy Boyina Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Ms.Sudha Murthy Boytina, 8-7-177/48/10/1/D, 1st Floor, Bownapally, Tirumalagiri, Hyderabad 2 The Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(6), Hyderabad 3 The Pr.CIT, Hyderabad 4 The DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 5 Guard File By Order "