NAGA SUBBAREDDY DORASALA,KADAPA vs. ITO, WARD-1, KADAPA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2144/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 August 2026AY 2019-2012 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 230 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) subject to a cost of Rs. 2,500/-. Since the CIT(A) had not decided the appeal on merits, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 93 days. The assessee explained the delay was due to personal family responsibilities and reliance on a tax consultant, and that the appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a 230-day delay. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without a decision on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and whether the appeal should be decided on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD

Pronounced: 07.08.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ�, हैदराबाद INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD SMC-BENCH, HYDERABAD

SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT ITA 2144/HYD/2025 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2019-2020 NAGA SUBBAREDDY ITO, WARD-1 DORASALA INCOME TAX 1/74, NARASA REDDY OFFICER, WARD-1, PALLI, UPPARAPALLE KADAPA Vs. CHENNUR MANDAL, KADAPA-, ANDHRA KADAPA-516162, PRADESH ANDHRA PRADESH अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent Permanent Account Number ATHPD4539M of Assessee: अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: Adv S Sandhya ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: SR-AR B Laxmi Kanth सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 30.07.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 07.08.2026

2 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025 आदेश / ORDER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.06.2025 of the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short "NFAC"], Delhi, for the assessment year 2019-2020.

2.

There is a delay of 93 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of along with the affidavit. The learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that the assessee is employed with Kadapa District Cooperative Bank. Assessee is living in joint family and looking after the affairs of the family as the father of the assessee was very aged and passed away on 12.04.2023. The assessee was depending upon the tax consultant for the tax matters and therefore, under the bonafide belief and impression that the Chartered Accountant who filed the appeal had taken care of the proceedings before CIT(A). Only in the month of November 2025 when the assessee consulted the Chartered Accountant and enquired about the status of the appeal then, he verified from the Income Tax Portal and

3 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025 said appeal before the CIT(A) was already decided vide order dated 27.06.2025. Accordingly, the assessee took steps to file the present appeal before the Tribunal on 02.12.2025. Thus, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that the delay of 93 days in filing the appeal may be condoned and the appeal of the assessee be admitted for adjudication on merits.

3.

On the other hand, the learned DR objected to the condonation of delay and submitted that there was a delay of 230 days before the CIT(A) and appeal of the assessee was dismissed as not maintainable being barred by limitation. This shows the gross negligence on the part of the assessee as not showing any seriousness for the tax matters and proceedings.

4.

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the contents of the affidavit filed by the assessee which reads as under:

4 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025

5 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025

6 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025

4.1. Thus, the assessee has explained the delay in filing the appeal that assessee was looking after the family affairs and he is living in joint family and also looking after the agricultural operations of the joint family. It is explained that the father of the assessee was not maintaining good health and ultimately expired on 12.04.2023 and thereafter the entire responsibility of the family was on the assessee and therefore, the assessee could not pay attention to the tax matters but was solely depending on the tax consultant who filed appeal before the CIT(A). Thus, due to the lack of knowledge of the order passed by the CIT(A), the assessee could not file the appeal within the period of limitation. Considering these reasons and taking a lenient view that the

7 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025 assessee is an individual and addition was made by the Assessing Officer while passing the ex-parte order on account of cash deposit in the bank account, which the assessee has explained that the income of the family from agriculture and further the deposit in the bank account was for the purpose of purchase of the land were not explained before the Assessing Officer. The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine. Accordingly, the delay of 93 days in filing the appeal is condoned, subject to cost of Rs.2,500/- [Rs. Two Thousand Five Hundred Only] to be paid to ITAT Tax Bar Association, Hyderabad within a period of one month from the date of this order.

5.

The assessee has read the following grounds of appeal:

1) “The order of the learned CIT (A) is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2) The learned CIT (A) erred in deciding the appeal without providing proper opportunity to the appellant herein. 3) The learned CIT (A) ought to have condoned the delay of 230 days in filing the appeal and decided the appeal on merits.

8 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025 4) The learned CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay and in not considering the grounds on merits. 5) Any other ground/grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing.”

6.

At the outset, it is noted that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine being barred by limitation as there was delay of 230 days in filing the appeal before him. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in Form-35 and also filed petition for condonation of delay. The assessee has explained the reasons for delay that the father of the assessee was not maintaining good health and due to age old the assessee was looking after the entire joint family affairs including agriculture operations and ultimately the father of the assessee expired on 12.04.2023. Since the assessee was depending on the Chartered Accountant who is looking after the tax matter of the assessee therefore, the assessee was not aware about the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and only on the receipt of penalty order passed u/sec.272A(1)(d) of the Act dated 19.08.2024, the assessee took steps to file the appeal before

9 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025 the learned CIT(A). Thus, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has pleaded that the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) may be condoned as the addition made by the Assessing Officer is highly improper, arbitrary and unjustified when the alleged payment was made through banking channel and not in cash. He has referred to the bank statement as well as the sale deed whereby the assessee purchased the land, and payment was made through cheque which is reflected in the sale deed as well as in the bank account statement of the assessee.

7.

On the other hand, the learned DR objected to the condonation of delay before the CIT(A) and submitted that this is a case of gross negligence on the part of the assessee.

8.

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the reasons explained by the assessee for delay of 230 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A). It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer has made the impugned addition of Rs.10,99,330/- on account of cash payment for goods and services whereas it is manifest from

10 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025 the record that the said payment of Rs.10 lakhs was made through banking channel for purchase of land and the cheque issued by the assessee for purchase consideration are appearing in the bank account statement as well as matching with the details of the payment in the sale deed. Thus, to the extent of payment of Rs.10 lakhs the same is made by cheque. However, these facts and records were not considered by the Assessing Officer as well as by the learned CIT(A) due to the reason that the Assessing Officer has passed an ex-parte order, and the learned CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits. Accordingly, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking a lenient view, the delay of 230 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) is condoned subject to cost of Rs.2,500/- [Rs. Two Thousand Five Hundred Only] to be paid to the ITAT Tax Bar Association, Hyderabad within a period of one month from the date of this order.

9.

Since the learned CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits but the same was dismissed being barred by limitation and the delay in filing the appeal

11 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025 is now condoned by this order therefore, the order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the Assessing Officer for proper verification and examination of the relevant facts and evidence regarding the alleged payment of Rs.10,99,330/-. Needless to say, the assessee be given an appropriate opportunity of hearing before passing the fresh order.

10.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07.08.2026.

Sd/- VIJAY PAL RAO VICE PRESIDENT

Hyderabad, Dated 07th day of August, 2026

VBP

12 ITA.No.2144/Hyd./2025 Copy to: NAGA SUBBAREDDY DORASALA, 1/74, NARASA 1 REDDY PALLI, UPPARAPALLE CHENNUR MANDAL, KADAPA-516162, ANDHRA PRADESH 2 ITO, WARD-1, KADAPA, ANDHRA PRADESH 3 THE PR. CIT, KURNOOL. 4 THE D.R., ITAT, HYDERABAD SMC-BENCH, HYDERABAD. 5 GUARD FILE VADREV TRUE COPY Digitally signed by VADREVU U PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / Date: PRASAD I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD 2026.08.07 11:23:49 A RAO +05'30'

More judgments on Section 272A(1)(d)

All 1,125 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(1)(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →