VENKATA PRASADA RAO NANDINA,RAJAHMUNDRY V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE , , RAJAHMUNDRY

ITA 325/VIZ/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Venkata Prasada Rao Nandina, the appellant, who appealed against the ex parte dismissal of his earlier appeal by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, concerning the assessment year 2020-21. The dismissal was due to the appellant's failure to respond to multiple notices. However, the appellant did file an adjournment request in response to the last notice, which was not considered by the Ld. CIT(A) before dismissing the appeal. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775790 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APARNA VILLURI
• Assessee Lawyers: A. ARUNA; HYBRID
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH AT HYDERABAD (Through Virtual Hearing) श्री विजय पाल राि, उपाध् यक्ष एिं श्री मिुसूदन सािडिया, लेखा सदस् य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.325/VIZ/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2020-21) Shri Venkata Prasada Rao Nandina, Rajahmundry. PAN: AJVPN3334L Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Smt. A. Aruna, Advocate (Hybrid) रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr. Aparna Villuri, SR-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 10/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 12/09/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M. : This appeal is filed by Shri Venkata Prasada Rao Nandina (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3 (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 24.03.2025 for the A.Y. 2020-21. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.325/VIZ/2025 2 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) for A.Y. 2019-20 under sections 144 r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) dated 22.09.2022. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before this Tribunal. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that although the assessee could not respond to the earlier notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), in response to the last notice dated 17.03.2025, the assessee had filed an application for adjournment on 19.03.2025 seeking time of ten days. However, without considering the said adjournment petition, the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to dismiss the appeal ex parte. The Ld. AR contended that the assessee would not derive any benefit by allowing the appeal to be dismissed in default and is seriously interested in prosecuting the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.325/VIZ/2025 3 matter on merits. He therefore prayed that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A), relying on the principles of natural justice. 5. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”), submitted that the assessee was provided multiple opportunities by the Ld. CIT(A). It was only at the last stage that the assessee filed an adjournment petition without filing any explanation or supporting documents. Therefore, according to the Ld. DR, there is no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A), and the same deserves to be upheld. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted position that the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on multiple occasions, but had filed an adjournment petition on 19.03.2025 in response to the last notice dated 17.03.2025. Without considering the said petition, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte. Be that as it may, we are of the view that the assessee should be granted one final opportunity to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A). Denial of such an opportunity would amount to violation of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for adjudication afresh on merits, after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to file all Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.325/VIZ/2025 4 necessary evidence and explanations in support of his claim and to fully cooperate with the proceedings without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12th Sept., 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad. Dated: 12.09.2025. * Reddy gp Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. Shri Venkata Prasada Rao Nandina, 86-2-21/A2, Flat No.2, Sangetham Venkatareddy Street, Rajahmundry. 2. The ACIT, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry. 3. Pr.CIT, Visakhapatnam. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, Printed from counselvise.com "