YEDDULA VENKATA NARAYANA REDDY,BELLARY vs. ITO, WARD1 & TPS, HOSPET

ITA 415/BANG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 September 2026AY 2017-186 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay in filing, without condonation. The assessee had passed away after the assessment order was passed, and the appeal was filed by the legal heir who claimed ignorance of the proceedings and the assessment order due to illness and lack of technical knowledge.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that fairness requires remitting the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The legal heir should produce evidence of agricultural activities and the source of cash deposits, and the Assessing Officer must establish proper service of notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal before the CIT(A) should have been dismissed on technical grounds of delay without considering the sufficient cause, and whether the cash deposits represented unexplained income or agricultural savings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 147,Section 144,Section 10(1),Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

PER SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT

01.

This appeal has been filed by Mrs Venkata Laxmi Devi, legal heir of the late Mr Yeddula Venkata Narayana Reddy (the assessee/appellant), for Assessment Year 2017–18 against the appellate order dated 9 December 2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (the learned CIT(A)). By that order, the learned CIT(A) di

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,187 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →