RAVI KUMAR KANDALA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-12(6), HYDERABAD

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘ 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 No. 333/Hyd/2025 (िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Ravi Kumar Kandala Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 12(6) PAN:AJPPK3365G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा�रती �ारा/Assessee by: CA Yadagiri Bhoopathi राज� व �ारा/Revenue by:: Shri Karthik Manickam,SR.AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 09/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15/04/2026 आदेश/ORDER Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

This appeal is filed by Shri Ravi Kumar Kandala (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Guntur (“Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 06.01.2017 for the A.Y.2011-12. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

13 savings bank account maintained with ICICI Bank. The Ld. AO called upon the assessee to explain the source of the said cash deposits. In the absence of any satisfactory explanation from the side of the assessee, the Ld. AO treated the entire cash deposits of Rs.26,75,785/- as unexplained and added the same to the income of the assessee. Accordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 31.03.2014, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.29,31,735/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the assessee did not comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Ld. CIT (A). 5. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee had filed an appeal before this Tribunal with a delay of 2913 days. The Tribunal, vide its order in ITA No. 333/Hyd/2025 dated 10.06.2025, declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of limitation. Subsequently, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble Telangana High Court, which condoned the delay of 2913 days and restored the appeal to its original number, i.e., ITA No. 333/Hyd/2025, with a direction to the Tribunal to decide the appeal on merits, subject to payment of cost of Rs.50,000/- to the Telangana State Legal Services Authority within two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. The relevant portion of the order of Hon’ble Telangana High Court is reproduced as under: “13. Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of records, admittedly the appellant had preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) aggrieved of the assessment order passed

14 by the Assessing Officer. In the memo of appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) itself, the address for issuance of notice and other initiations lo be made were that of the consultant, who had preferred the appeal on behalf of the appellant. However, the notices were issued to the address of the appellant but not at the address of the consultant. The appellant has on affidavit stated that the address given so far as the appellant is concerned was changed and hence the notices which were issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at his old residence could not be served upon him. 14. In the aforesaid admitted factual matrix of the case, admittedly there was no representation on behalf of the appellant when the appeal was being decided. Though there was no representation on behalf of the appellant, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has decided the appeal on merits affirming them order of the A.O. Another aspect which has been revealed during the proceedings is that the appellant had lost his father during the relevant point of time, which also had created certain difficult situation at the domestic front so far as the appellant is concerned. True it is that there is an inordinate delay on the part of the appellant in preferring an appeal before the Tribunal, that too of 2913 days. But the said delay if not condoned, the appellant would be left remediless against the assessment order which has been confirmed on merits by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 15. In view of the same, we are of the considered opinion that subject to the appellant depositing a heavy costs of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to the Telangana State Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, the appeal before the Tribunal i.e. ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 would stand restored to its original number and the delay of 2913 days in filing of the appeal would also as a consequence gets condoned. The Tribunal is directed to decide the appeal i.e. ITA No.333/Hyd/2025 on its own merits subject to the appellant depositing the aforesaid amount within a period of two weeks. Let the appellant thereafter enter appearance before the Tribunal on 06.04.2026. Considering the assessment order to be that of the assessment year 2011-12, let the appeal itself be decided as expeditiously as possible. 16. The instant appeal accordingly stands allowed”. 6. At the outset, the Learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the assessee received the certified copy of the order of the Hon’ble Telangana High

15 Court on 30.03.2026 and complied with the said direction by depositing Rs.50,000/- with the Telangana State Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad on 02.04.2026. The receipt evidencing such payment has been placed on record, which is to the following effect:

16 drew our attention to the copy of the registered sale deed placed at page nos. 49 to 58 of the paper book. It was further submitted that out of the said sale proceeds, the assessee received a gift of Rs.10,75,000/- from his mother on the same day, i.e., 11.03.2011. In support of this, the assessee has filed an affidavit of his mother, placed at page nos. 59 to 61 of the paper book. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee deposited the said gift amount in his bank account. Subsequently, on 18.03.2011, out of concern for the financial security of his parents, the assessee returned a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to them through banking channels. Thereafter, the parents withdrew the said amount in cash and again gifted the same to the assessee on 23.03.2011, which was again deposited in the bank account of the assessee. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has also filed supporting affidavits and bank statements in this regard. The Ld. AR further submitted that the remaining cash deposits were made out of past savings of the assessee. It was contended that the evidences, including the registered sale deed, affidavit of the mother, and bank statements, could not be produced before the lower authorities and are being filed for the first time before the Tribunal as additional evidence. Accordingly, a petition under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 was filed for admission of additional evidence. The Ld. AR prayed that the additional evidence be admitted and the matter be decided in favour of the assessee. 8. Per contra, The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) submitted that the additional evidence filed by the assessee has not been examined or verified by the lower authorities. Therefore, the same requires proper verification. Accordingly, the Ld. DR fairly submitted that the

17 matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. AO for verification of the additional evidence and for deciding the issue afresh in accordance with law. 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We have also gone through the additional evidences filed by the assessee, including the copy of the registered sale deed of the property, affidavit of the mother of the assessee, and bank statements placed in the paper book, and on perusal of the same, we find that these documents are crucial for determining the source of the cash deposits made by the assessee in his bank account. It is an admitted fact that the assessee could not produce these evidences before the lower authorities, which resulted in the addition being made by the Ld. AO. The assessee has now sought to explain the source of cash deposits primarily on account of gift received from his mother out of sale proceeds of immovable property, supported by documentary evidences. Considering the nature of the evidences and the explanation offered by the assessee, we are of the considered view that these additional evidences go to the root of the matter and are essential for adjudication of the issue in dispute. Therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, we admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963. At the same time, since these evidences have not been examined by the lower authorities, the principles of natural justice require that the Ld. AO be given an opportunity to verify the same. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue to the file of the Ld. AO with a direction to examine the additional evidences filed by the assessee and decide the issue of addition of Rs.26,75,785/- afresh on merits in accordance with law, after providing

18 adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file any further evidences in support of his claim before the Ld. AO. The Ld. AO is directed to consider the same and pass a speaking order in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed not to seek unnecessary adjournments and to fully cooperate with the Ld. AO during the set-aside proceedings. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 15th April, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 15th April, 2026. Vinodan/sps Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Shri Ravi Kumar Kandala, Flat No.801, Pridhvi Block, My Home Nawadeepa Apartments, Madhapur, Hitech City, Hyderabad 500081 2 Income Tax Officer Ward 12(6) Hyderabad 3 Pr. CIT - Hyderabad 4 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 5 Guard File By Order VADREVU Digitally signed by VADREVU PRASADA PRASADA RAO Date: 2026.04.17 RAO 10:37:31 +05'30'