SURYA NAIK RATHLAVATH,NAGARKURNOOL vs. ITO, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1583/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 July 2026AY 2018-197 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. The assessee was granted a final opportunity to substantiate their claims, with directions for expeditious disposal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution after the assessment order was passed ex parte. The assessee argued a lack of adequate opportunity and violation of natural justice principles.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied adequate opportunity of being heard by the lower authorities, leading to a violation of natural justice principles.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A‘ Bench, Hyderabad

Before: Shri Ravish SoodShri Madhusudan Sawdia

Hearing: 08/07/2026

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A‘ Bench, Hyderabad �ी रिवश सूद,�ाियक सद� एवं �ी मधुसूदन साविड़या लेखा सद� सम� | Before Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos. 1901& 1583/Hyd/2025 (िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Surya Naik Vs. Income Tax Officer Rathlavath, Ward 10(1) Secunderabad Hyderabad PAN: BEKPR2217H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा�रती �ारा/Assessee by: Advocate S. Sandhya राज� व �ारा/Revenue by: Shri Mohan Babu, Sr.AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 08/07/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15/07/2026 आदेश/ORDER Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

These two appeals are filed by Shri Surya Naik Rathlavath (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the separate orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (“Ld. CIT(A)”) both dated 28.08.2025 for the A.Y. 2018-19. Since the issues raised by the assessee in these two appeals are inter- related, for the sake of convenience, these were heard together and are being disposed of by this common and consolidated order.

2.

At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 12 days in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay. The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) did not raise any objection to the condonation of delay. On perusal of the affidavit and the petition for condonation of delay, we do not find any mala fide intention on the part of the assessee in causing the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the delay of 12 days in filing the present appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. ITA No.1901/Hyd/2025: 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

4.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) for Assessment Year 2018-19 under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) dated 30.11.2023. However, during the appellate proceedings, the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. The Learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the Ld. CIT(A) without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and, therefore, there is a violation of the principles of natural justice. It was further submitted that the assessee has a good case on merits; however, due to the lack of an effective opportunity, the assessee could not properly represent and prosecute his case before the lower authorities. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessment order itself was passed

ex parte under section 144 of the Act. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, he prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication after providing one more opportunity to the assessee in the interest of justice. 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR opposed the submissions of the assessee and submitted that both the lower authorities had provided sufficient opportunities of being heard to the assessee, which the assessee failed to avail. Therefore, according to the Ld. DR, no further opportunity is warranted. 7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessment order was passed ex parte under section 144 of the Act and the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was also dismissed for non-prosecution. Thus, the issues involved in the appeal have not been examined on merits after considering the relevant evidences and submissions of the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in order to provide one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his claim, we deem it appropriate to set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. AO with a direction to provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter adjudicate the issues involved in the appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all necessary evidences and submissions in support of his claim before the Ld. AO. The assessee is also directed not to seek any unnecessary

adjournment during the remand proceedings and to extend full cooperation for expeditious disposal of the matter. In case the assessee fails to cooperate, the Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law on the basis of material available on record. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 1901/Hyd/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 1583/Hyd/2025: 9. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

10.

The present appeal relates to the levy of penalty arising from the quantum addition which is the subject matter of appeal in ITA No. 1901/Hyd/2025. The quantum addition in the case of the assessee involved in ITA No. 1901/Hyd/2025 has already been set aside by us to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication. Since the quantum assessment itself has been restored to the file of the Ld. AO for reconsideration, the

penalty proceedings, being consequential and dependent upon the outcome of the quantum proceedings, are also required to be restored to the file of the Ld. AO. In our considered view, the sustainability of the impugned penalty can be examined only after the issues involved in the quantum assessment attain finality. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned penalty order and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. AO with a direction to adjudicate the penalty proceedings afresh, if so warranted, after finalization of the quantum assessment in accordance with law. The Ld. AO shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing any order. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all documentary evidences and submissions in support of his claim before the Ld. AO. The assessee is also directed not to seek any unnecessary adjournment during the remand proceedings and to extend full cooperation for expeditious disposal of the matter. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1583/Hyd/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. 12. To sum up, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 15th July, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 15th July, 2026. Vinodan/sps

Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 (a) Shri Surya Naik Rathlavath, Bolliguttathanda, Chedurpally Village, Veldanda Mandal, NAGAR KURNOOL 502209 (b) Shri Surya Naik Rathlavath, 1020/6 Railway Quarters, Hamalbasthi, Chikalguda, Hyderabad 500061 2 Income Tax Officer Ward 10(1) IT Towers, AC Guards, Hyderabad 3 Pr. CIT –, Hyderabad 4 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 5 Guard File

By Order TUMMALACHARLA Digitally signed by TUMMALACHARLA LAKSHMI NARAYANA DN: cn=TUMMALACHARLA LAKSHMI LAKSHMI NARAYANA, c=IN, o=INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ou=INCOME TAX NARAYANA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI BENCH Date: 2026.07.15 12:20:21 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →